Thursday, December 31, 2009

Canada's weather is "crazy", but Copenhagen's "solutions" aren't?

Further to my earlier post here, there was another story citing "Environment Canada's chief climatologist" David Phillips, this time counting down Dave's top ten "2009's weather winners", (Christina Spencer, St.Catharines Standard, Dec.31, 2009).
"Climate change" - as anthropogenic global warming - was NOT mentioned in the article at all - but Canada's Cagey Climatologist David Phillips did tell us the weather was "crazy".
'Crazy' eh?!
Love that scientific climatologist lingo - right up there with Phillips' other terms describing weather as a "crapshoot" and a "wildcard".
Phillips was quoted saying that the number one weather story in Canada was "the summer of discontent...thirty-three million Canadians were cursing the weather during the summer."
So what?! This is just more glib Phillips locquaciousness, meaning very little.
"Discontent"?! Seriously?!
All "thirty three million Canadians" were discontented with the weather?! Really, 'Crazy' Dave?
The report states "Depending on where you were in Canada, it was either "too hot, too cold, too dry, too wet, too stormy" Phillips said.
'Depending on where you were'?!? Has that not ALWAYS been the case, Dave, in Canada, or ANYWHERE ELSE on the planet???!
Phillips cited that for nine months there was a "MINI ICE AGE" (!!) in the Prairies - which ominously SUDDENLY ENDED!!
Oh my! (Could we have STOPPED THAT by grovelling before the Copenhagen Greensheviks? Do tell us, Dave!)
We had "gully washers" and tornadoes and fires and cold and floods and drought and "hailers" and windstorms... oh my! Never seen that before in Canada.
Strangely, Dave Phillips - Canada's senior climatologist! - didn't say/wasn't asked what the 'number one climate story' in Canada was, though (ClimateGate?); and whether his weather factoids had anything to do with know... MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING?!

The Red's Greenshevist avatar

Further to my earlier post (here) "The Jokenhagen Greenmailers"....

[...where I wrote:
"There are two more good reads on the GreenidiotTM climatalarmistTM GreenmailersTM, plying their GreenFearTM over at the JokenhagenTM Climate Shakedown:

Peter Foster's story, "Canada's Galileo government" (National Post, Dec.16, 2009, here)


Charles Krauthammer's story, "The new socialism", (National Post, Dec.14, 2009, here).

Krauthammer continues on the subject of the new green bolshevism {which I wrote of here, on Apr.6, 2008, "The Reds' Green Show: Into the heart of darkness"}...]
... Writer Lorne Gunter continued on the same theme, examining the GreenFear-pushers, in "Environmentalism is just the latest way to tell other people what to do" (National Post, Dec.30, 2009, here):

"The decade just past marked the transition from red into green. It was the decade in which environmentalism replaced socialism as the authoritarians’ and the busybodies’ ideology of choice.

Why are so few environmentalists truly unhappy about the failure at Copenhagen? In the run-up to this month’s Earth summit in the Danish capital, many “greens” were warning that if the world’s leaders failed to reach a comprehensive pact to control climate change our planet was doomed within the century. In the summer, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon insisted “we have four months to save the planet.”

But nothing that will save the planet came out of the UN eco-fest.

Yes, world leaders kinda, sorta agreed to limit global average temperature rise to two degrees Celsius over the next 100 years (as if they had some magical powers to achieve that end). But that is a political goal, not a scientific one. No formula has been worked out detailing what concentration of carbon dioxide in the air will keep temps from rising by more than two degrees. And even if there were such a calculation, it wouldn’t matter: Leaders at the summit made no firm commitments to keep their countries’ CO2 emissions to amounts within scientifically verifiable limits.

Given the absence of such commitments, you would think environmentalists like Al Gore would be in full hand-wringing, caterwauling dudgeon since the collapse at Copenhagen. Just weeks ago they were claiming we would die out as a species if no deep, binding emission cuts were agreed. None were. Yet, while not fully happy, eco-activists have not been screaming at world leaders over their unwillingness to accept meaningful emissions caps. Instead, the greenies have been doing their best to put a sunny face on the results.

Why? Mostly because saving the planet is not what environmentalism is all about. Saving the planet is just the excuse. Controlling other people’s lives and redistributing global wealth is the true goal.

I’m not saying there is a conscious conspiracy by old socialists meeting in secret to rebrand themselves as new environmentalists so they can revive their Cold War-era campaign for international governance and regulation.

Rather, it’s a mindset. The instinct to tell other people what to do is as old as human society. The instant two homo sapiens first came together, one of them probably decided that the other was doing things in a way he or she disliked and that what was needed to deter this miscreant behaviour was a new rule based on an appeal to the “common good.”

So the mindset that today wants to tell others how much carbon energy they can consume — what kind of vehicle is “responsible,” how big their homes should be, how many hours a day they should run their furnaces or air conditioners or televisions, what kind of light bulbs they should use and so on — is as old as mankind itself.

Sometimes it has manifested itself as a demand by high priests for devotion to pagan deities. Sometimes it has been the demand for blind loyalty to a monarch. Other times it has been the insistence that the church is infallible and must be listened to on all matters lest our immortal souls be damned for eternity. More recently, it has raised its preachy, sanctimonious head as communism, socialism, political correctness and environmentalism.

There is no question the political right has its incidents of interfering, controlling behaviours: the insistence, for instance, that the state pass laws upholding socially conservative morals.

However, it’s no coincidence that much of the impetus for worldwide control of emissions comes from the left. Nor is it a coincidence that most environmentalists are also supporters of universal health care, social justice, high taxes, the heavy regulation of commerce and the transfer — by compulsion, if necessary — of hundreds of billions of dollars from rich countries to poor.

That’s just their mindset: To be happy, they have to be telling others what to do based on a self-assured belief in their own moral and intellectual superiority.

That’s why so many greens are at least half happy about Copenhagen. The Earth summit kept alive their demand for wealth transfers of historic proportions. And it saved their desire for a greater role for international bureaucrats in the business of sovereign nations.

When socialism collapsed as an intellectual movement in the 1990s, the intrusive, holier-than-thou, we-know-best attitude behind it did not disappear, it merely refashioned itself in the last decade as environmentalism."
Akin to green fascism, actually.
Here is another similar overview, from a theistic-philosophical perspective, on Gunter's and Krauthammer's columns regarding these newly-tranformed Climate Reds who are now peddling their Utopian, not-so-New World Order Green Bolshevism (Greenshevism TM):

Ellen Myers wrote (here) in "Thomas Molnar: A Christian Scholar for Our Time":

"Part 11: The Confluence of Pantheist and Atheist Utopianism

In his masterful Utopia, The Perennial Heresy Thomas Molnar begins by pointing out that utopian thinkers throughout history have never been content with mere mending or improving of that which falls short of perfection in existing reality and is on biblical Christian premises the result of man's fall into sin. A fallen world in which God's people must humbly work out their salvation in moment by moment trusting, faithful dependence upon God and His grace and mercy is intolerable to the proud utopian who thinks he knows (better than God) what the world ought to be like. Hence "utopian thinkers fully deserve to be called 'radical' because their reconstruction of society and man demands total re-thinking about God and creation."[1]

Utopians demand absolute perfection and purity in society, a seemingly attractive trait until we realize that their goal and "perhaps [their] main motivation" is an unnatural, anti-human perfection and purity of their own invention which "would so de-nature man that it would have to be enforced."[2] This accounts for the totalitarian suppression of any and all "dissidents "once a utopian movement comes to power. Modern Communism with its purist demand for the totally "classless society," and Nazism obsessed with its delusion of evolutionist-Darwinist "racial purity" are classic examples.

Molnar rightly emphasizes that "Christianity...taught that man transforms the world for the glory of God and for his own contentment[3]." In the biblical Christian framework each individual man and woman is a unique person, and responsible to God as His steward entrusted by virtue of man's original creation with dominion over God's handiwork. Marx, on the other hand, asserted that work... was not an activity of man as a subject, but an action of nature manifesting itself through man. In fact, Marxist man is not a subject at all, but the locus (scene) of objective natural forces. In his Nationalokonomie und Philosophie Marx contended that man creates objects because the objects create him, because, according to his origin, he himself is nature[4].

Here is a flagrant instance of monism (nothing exists outside the universe; there is no transcendent Creator God), atheist-materialist as it happens yet quite compatible with pantheist-idealist "religious" monism in its denial of man's meaningful personhood. Hegel also considered man a mere locus of the activity of the universal World Spirit. Another monist denying real meaning to individual man was the famous Russian symbolist author Andrei Belyi (1880-1934). A devotee of a gnostic-Pantheist-occult branch of theosophy known as anthroposophy, he believed that man is merely the meeting place of "forces" and intelligences which may even think their thoughts in his brain, appearing to him as "self-thinking thoughts[5].'' Significantly Belyi longed for an apocalyptic new world which would replace the old Russia, and he considered himself a good Communist citizen when he died. Another example of the monistic reduction of man to a locus of outside forces is the behaviorism of B. F. Skinner, who described the utopian new Society of behaviorism in his notorious Beyond Freedom and Dignity. Here Skinner baldly agreed with C. S. Lewis that autonomous man, the man defended by the literatures of freedom and dignity," was being abolished in the Skinnerian world, but that "His abolition has long been overdue...To man qua man we readily say good riddance[6]. This book appeared four years after Molnar's Utopia. fully confirming Molnar's thesis of the unnaturalness to man, and hence totalitarian enforcement policy, of social-political utopianism.

Another essential feature of utopian thought is its globalism. Modern transportation and communications have greatly accelerated and reinforced the utopian assumption that we are about to see "a global melting pot to which each man brings his own unique contribution and receives the imprint of communal consciousness.[7]" It is not an entirely new assumption, as it was already held by the famous and prolific French feminist novelist George Sand (Aurore Dupin, Baroness Dudevant, 1804-1876), "Friend and patron of the French utopian socialists[8]," and by the Communist Manifesto of 1848. Globalism is, of course, compatible with both communist internationalism and pantheist mystical dreams about the "coalescence of all mankind" as the next evolutionary stage. Both envision a one-world government to enforce the "new order," the coming higher stage of history as emergent evolution. It can be made to sound quite heroic and attractive, as Molnar shows in quoting the Soviet philosopher A. Bogdanov:

The third main stage in history is that of the collective self-sufficient economy and the fusion of personal lives into one colossal whole, harmonious in the relations of its parts, systematically grouping all elements for one common struggle — the struggle against the endless spontaneity of nature.... It demands the forces not of man but of mankind— and only in working at this task does mankind as such emerge[9].

Bogdanov was among the small faction of Russian communists which included Lenin's Commissar of Education Anatoly Lunacharsky and, for a while, the famous writer Maxim Gorky and which called itself the "god-builders." The "god" they wished to build was socialist mankind. In 1908 Gorky wrote an entire book, Confession, on this theme, but left off "god-building" pursuant to Lenin's displeasure with any notion of "god". However, Molnar perceptively points out that utopian perfectionism in general "is actually a conscious and concentrated form of self-divinization.... In fact, mankind and nature ascend the path of progress together until the cosmos will be indistinguishable from God[10]." Again we see the fundamental agreement, even sameness, between atheist and pantheist world views, regarding belief in the essential divinity of mankind and the cosmos as a whole. Molnar draws upon his prodigious research of French literature and philosophy to show us yet another example of an ostensibly agnostic utopian thinker with notions of human divinity, Ernest Renan ( 1823-1892). Renan is best known for his efforts to present Jesus Christ as a mere man, and the gospels as historically false. Yet for all that, Renan too had a religion and looked forward to a god:

In Caliban, Renan expressed the opinion that in the indeterminable future everything will become one single center of consciousness in which all human beings will participate... In the same way as mankind has emerged from animality, Renan continues, the divinity will emerge from mankind. In their turn, the superhuman gods will become one single god[11].

Renan's evolutionist belief in the emergence of man from animality is a common modern denominator of both pantheist "religious" and agnostic-atheist "secular rationalist" utopianism. This belief is shared by the French Jesuit priest Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (d. 1955), a pantheist-religious thinker who has become the "patron saint" of the Western "New Age" movement of the 1980s, and by the atheist, stridently anti-Christian Julian Huxley (grandson of T.H. Huxley, "Darwin's Bulldog"). Huxley wrote a preface to Teilhard de Chardin's The Phenomenon of Man in which he stated that "the incipient development of mankind into a single psycho-social unit, with a single noosystem, or common pool of thought, is providing the evolutionary process with the rudiments of a head[12]." Molnar is forthright in his condemnation of Teilhard de Chardin (whose writings were forbidden by the Catholic Church to be disseminated, a prohibition ignored by the apostate Jesuit's adoring followers):

Teilhard de Chardin [rendered the idea of God meaningless] by ingeniously combining contemporary admiration for science, socialism and irrationality with their respective vocabularies. The result, condemned by every line of the Old and New Testament, is the very content of the original sin.... His public forgets ... that man cannot step out of the human condition and that no "universal mind" is now being manufactured simply because science has permitted the building of nuclear bombs, spaceships and electronic computers[13].

In addition, Molnar states, "[Teilhard's] terminology, which mixes archaeology, sociology, biology, astronomy and a vulgarized theology, can, in fact, be translated at every turn into the language of collectivism and of totalitarian policies[14].'' Molnar fully understands what is at stake in this unified emergent evolutionist, radically anti-biblical drive for power:

If only matter and its evolutionary forms exist, then man, too, is only matter . . . If he is not a reflection of the divine being, then he is in no sense sacred and final, and new forms of evolution may supersede him.... Whether explained through Teilhard de Chardin or the Russian and Chinese communists, the solution is this: Man as we have known him is now being overcome by the new evolutionary form. This is not a new species, but coalesced mankind...
Both Teilhard de Chardin and the Communists speak of an indefinite evolution . . . Yet, the imagination of the one and the efforts of the others go only as far as "totalized" or totalitarian society... everything else is figure of style or outright fuzziness[15].

Because the perennial ideal of utopians is a radically "new" age and mankind in which all shall be one, utopians are egalitarian to the core. Hence they "are necessarily antagonistic to money and all its functions I (trade, savings, investment) because possession of money allows for individual choice which, in turn, confuses centralized planning[16]." Molnar cites J.K. Galbraith's well-known and influential book The Affluent Society and Thomas More's Utopia as examples of such egalitarian utopian thinking. Utopians must also do away with individualized education and upbringing of children, which entails their desire to remove children from the care of their parents and, indeed, their implied or open hostility towards the family. This hostility can be observed in all socialistic systems, especially Marxism. For an invaluable confirmation of this fact, see Igor Shafarevich's comprehensive study, The Socialist Phenomenon, in which he defines the contours of socialism as ( I ) abolition of private property; (2) abolition of the family; (3) abolition of religion, especially Christianity; and (4) communality or equality[17]. Shafarevich refers to certain medieval heretical movements, such as the English Ranters or the German Anabaptists under Thomas Muenzer, also discussed by Molnar, and he shows that they were not only religious heretics but also socialist revolutionists in their leveling egalitarianism. The work of Molnar and Shafarevich has been fully confirmed and indeed anticipated by the British historian Norman Cohn in his authoritative study The Pursuit of the Millenium, which contains extensive excerpts from the writings of leading Ranters[18]. Cohn also recognized and pointed out the ideological and practical affinity between these movements and modern Nazism and Communism. The careful and thorough scholarly research of Cohn, Molnar and Shafarevich leaves no doubt but that anti-Christian pantheist utopianism of past history and in today's "new age" movement, and anti-Christian atheist and socialist utopianism are not opponents but merely two sides of the same coin. This fact is also evident from the egalitarian goals and methods shared by the utopian novels of past and present, such as Thomas More's Utopia. Tommaso Campanellais City of the Sun, "The Law of Freedom" by Gerrard Winstanley, the numerous philosophical utopian novels written during the Enlightenment, socialist utopias like Edward Bellamy's Looking Backward, and others[19].

Let us turn to an instance of actual cooperation between religious pantheists, assorted mystics, and militant socialists and Marxists. In the 1890s and 1900s there existed in London a far-flung, loosely connected network of groups and individuals calling itself the "New Life" movement. It included George Bernard Shaw, the witty author, a "vitalist" pantheist and socialist; Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, the founder of modern theosophy, and her lieutenant and successor Annie Besant, a pioneer of birth control; H. M. Hyndman, a prominent British Marxist; Ermund Gurney, founder of the society for Psychical Research (spiritist); Havelock Ellis, the famous sexologist; and leaders of the socialist Fabian Society and the Independent Labour Party. One of the movement's branches was the Fellowship of the New Life, founded in 1882, of which Ramsay MacDonald, the future labour prime minister, was secretary for ten years. This Fellowship in turn was closely linked with the Brotherhood Church, whose pastor John C. Kenworthy helped promote communes formed by the followers of the Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy. Tolstoy was a member of the movement. His most famous disciple was none other than Mohandas K. Gandhi, a revered personality among adherents of the "New Age" movement now[20]. Obviously religion, pantheism, occultism, or atheism was not at issue between supporters of the "New Life" movement. The Brotherhood Church even cooperated in facilitating the 1907 conference of the Russian Social Democrat (Communist) Party. When this conference found itself ousted from Copenhagen by the Swedish police, the delegates eventually straggled across to London. Here Ramsay MacDonald, the British socialist leader, was of some help to them; he managed to obtain the use of the Brotherhood Church in Whitechapel in the east end of London. It belonged to a severe religious sect known as the Christian Socialists, and the agreement was that the Russians should hold their meetings in this odd place for a period of three days. Three weeks later the Christian Socialists were still pleading with their guests to leave the building just long enough for them to get in for their Sunday prayer meeting[21].

This instance of Communist "takeover" should be a warning to religious utopians collaborating with them, but will almost certainly not deter them as they overlook even the bloody record of Communism wherever it has "taken over" since 1917.

Molnar points to a far deeper lesson missed by socialist utopians, the invincibility of reality created by God as shown in human society:

Passion for equality blinds the utopian to the fact that society as a whole, is based on inequality among men in two respects: the inventor, the innovator, the exceptional man creates something new and insures continuous progress; the others emulate his work or merely improve their own lot by benefiting from his creativity. Now, to deny to this exceptional man the extra to extirpate his inventiveness. The sorry state of socialist regimes shows that no amount of officially stimulated collective enthusiasm for the artificially defined common good is a substitute for individual incentive and reward. It is significant that in Communist societies "capitalist" advantages are granted to the few on whom rest the regime's spectacular achievements, such as space technology and aircraft production[22].

Elsewhere Molnar points to the pervading unreality or anti-reality of utopian thought:

When the utopian writers deal with work, health, leisure, life expectancy, war, crimes, culture, administration, finances, judges and so on, it is as if their words were uttered by an autoimaton with no conception of real life. The reader has the uncomfortable feeling of walking in a dream-land of abstractions, surrounded by lifeless objects[23]...

In practice, too, as the experience of Nazism, Communism, and also of socialist empires like ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt and China, or the Incas amply proves[24], egalitarian utopianism reduces real flesh-and blood individual men, women and children to less than human cogs in the monolithic state machinery. As Molnar rightly says, the utopian, while believing that he can compensate for man's finiteness and the world's flaws by building a new, collective society "succeeds only in depriving the individual of his limited freedom and, therefore, of the value of his action.[25]" In eliminating the Creator God of the Bible, man, the being created in God's own image and likeness is also abolished; and all this, ironically, in the name of ideologies promising man, or collective mankind, mastery of nature and being god himself. Finally and ominously, Molnar correctly points out that "the trend [toward a one-world collectivist, God- and man-denying utopian government] has been unmistakable for a long time now [written 1967!]: the mechanism is in place; small, concrete decisions are made daily; only the theoretical measures are still discussed.[26]"

We do well to come to grips with the premises and goals of utopian thought and practice. We need to understand that it makes little difference whether we are confronted with pantheist-religious or atheist-materialist movements; the two are but the twin blades of the pincers in which the perennial rebellion against God as sovereign Creator, which began with the serpent in Eden, seeks to crush us. Our answer must be to cleave more firmly than ever to our Creator Who established true reality by His unchanging, eternal Word, Who created us men uniquely in His own image and likeness, redeemed us from sin by His Son Jesus Christ, and Who holds us and all things and events in His hands. Nothing can come to pass without His will, and the timing is His as well. Reality itself in its fixed traits bears witness to the Creator, and exposes all utopian schemes as delusions. Biblical creation is the foundation of all Christian doctrine. To preach and defend it is to be in the front line of the perennial war between God's people and rebels against God who would be gods themselves. Because our God is Lord of all things, and because Christ is our Advocate and God the Holy Spirit our Intercessor, we also have the mighty weapon and ever availing comfort of prayer. Let us then boldly occupy and win others to the Lord of hosts, the Maker of true reality and the true Healer from sin and death as we await His promised and hence certain Coming Again in Glory.

[1]- Thomas Molnar Utopro The Perennial Heresy (New York: Sheed & Ward 1967)' p. 9 (hereafter cited as Molnar Utopia)
[2]- Ibid. p 22
[3]- Ibid p 31
[4]- Ibid. pp 37-38
[5]- Vladimir E Alexandrov Andre, Bely (Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press 1985) pp 104-l lS Also see Andrey Biely St Petersburg (New York: Grove Press Inc Second Print ng 1959) especially p 229.
[6]- B F Skinner Beyond Freedom and Dignity (New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Inc . 1971). pp 200 201. See also C.S.Lewis The Abolition of Mon (New York: Macmillan Fourth Printing 1968). especially Chapter 3 pp. 67-91
[7]- Molnar. Utopia. p 46.
[8]- Ibid. p 47.
[9]- Ibid. p 104
[10]- Ibid.. p. 45 p. 46.
[11]- Ibid . p 122
[12]- Ibid. p 125
[13]- Ibid. p. 71
[14]- Ibid. p. 128.
[15]- Ibid. p 223
[16]- Ibid pp. 140- 141
[17]- Igor Shafarevich The Socialist Phenomenon (New York: Harper & Row Publishers. 1980) especrally pp. 194-201.
[18]- Norman Cohn. The Pursuit of the Milleniium (New York: Harper TorchBooks 1961) especiall y Appendi x. p p 321 - 378
[19]- These writings are well surveyed in Shafarevich The Socialist Phenomenon pp.80- 120 Also see H. Van Riessen The Society of the Future (Philadelphia PA: The Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Co n.d. [probably 1952]). Chapter 3 ''Utopias." pp. 38-67.
[20]- This information is found in Martin Green. Tolstoy and Gandhi. Men of Peace (New York: Basic Books. 1983) pp. 97ff This book is very friendly toward Tolstoy Gandhi and the "New Life''movement.
[21]- Alan Moorehead. The Russian Revolution (New York: Bantam Books. November 1959). p 81
[22]- Molnar. Utopia. p. 153.
[23]- Ibid. p. 230
[24]- See Shafarevich. The Socialist Phenomenon pp. 132- 189.
[25]- Molnar. Utopia. p. 237
[26]- Ibid. p 146"
Reading the all the above, what to make then, of the blatantly (and ironically!) anti-capitalist, GreenWashedTM, Utopianist, well-timed-post-Copenhaganist-populism imbued in James (son of Chippawa, Ontario.) Cameron's just-released Avatar? (see Ross Douthat's column, "Heaven and nature", New York Times, Dec.20, 2009, here)
Are we so hypnotized by Avatar's flash of special-effects that we don't feel obligated to examine the underlying story - a tired old parable romanticizing the noble savage, with good doses of typical 'Hollywood Liberal' smugness thrown in?
By the way, will GreenFear-monger Al Gore (whose real avatar, strangely, operates with impunity here on earth) soon be selling profitable Unobtanium credits?

Friday, December 25, 2009

Merry Christmas

Olympic Torch runs through Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario

above: Dec.20, 2009 - crowds line Hwy.55 in Virgil, NOTL, cheering as the Olympic Flame Torch Run arrives.
above: Dec.20, 2009; in Virgil, one of the torch runners leaves the bus
above: Dec.20, 2009 - in Virgil, the passing of the Olympic flame, as another torch is just about to receive the flame. If anyone knows the names of some of the particpants here, please let me know
above: Dec.20, 2009 - as the Olympic flame was making its way down Hwy.55 from Virgil, people were already assembling in Niagara-on-the-Lake, waiting for its arrival along Queen St. by the Courthouse.
above: Dec.20, 2009 - awaiting the arrival of the Olympic Torch in Niagara-on-the-Lake, a girl proudly displays a sign reading "My Mom is an Olympian and She is carrying the Olympic torch today"!
above: Dec.20, 2009 - crowds gathered by the NOTL Cenotaph as the Olympic Torch run approaches
above: Dec.20, 2009, people stand on the steps of the Old Courthouse, awaiting the Olympic Torch.
In both Virgil and in Niagara-on-the-Lake's Old Town, there truly was a palpable and authentic joyfulness in the crowds as they assembled in anticipation for the arrival of the Torch. Celebratory outbursts of cheers, hoots and hollers were heard as the Olympic Flame approached, rising in joyous, awe-inspiring support as the Torch bearers came into view and passed. It was amazing, and humbling, to have seen our spirited, local contribution within such a memorable, national chain of events.
It was a proud day to be Canadian.
Penny Coles wrote in "NOTL vet carries torch on behalf of War Amps" (Niagara Advance, Dec.22, 2009, here):

"Percy Rescorl, a 90-year-old Second World War veteran from NOTL, has the flame passed to him by a young girl on Queen Street.

In the distance, the flashing lights of a police vehicle could be seen making its way toward Virgil, as hundreds of people lined the streets, waving flags in anticipation of the Olympic Torch Relay as it passed through town Sunday.

After the police came the red Coca Cola trucks, loud speakers blasting and employees handing out souvenir Coke bottles, the blue RBC truck with tambourines, all designed to whip the crowd into a frenzy as the torch bearers arrived.

It wasn't necessary - the crowd was there to cheer on their family, friends and neighbours who had been chosen for the honour, already excited and thrilled to witness the flame on its journey to Vancouver, igniting the country as it goes.

Some of the torchbearers were from Grimsby, Beamsville and Jordan, others - like Virgil Public School student Daniel Unger who jogged easily with his torch proudly held high - were from Niagara-on-the-Lake and were swarmed by locals, all were united by the exhilaration of being part of the excitement and Olympic spirit that is uniting Canadians.

Sunday was not the first time Percy Rescorl had proudly represented his country. He fought for Canada in the Second World War, and lost a leg in France. A member of the Royal Canadian Dragoons, he was made a member of the Legion d'Honneur, a French order established to reward soldiers for exemplary service in 2007.

He brought up his family in Niagara-on-the-Lake, and has always been and continues to be an amazing man, says his daughters Florence, Lynn and Susanne.

He was proud to be chosen by War Amps Canada to participate in the torch relay, and excited that his family, including children, grandchildren and great grandchildren, friends and neighbours would be cheering him on.

"What an honour for this 90-year old vet to be nominated to carry the Olympic Torch for Canada and for the best athletes of the world," said Rescorl, adding that he would carry it with the same pride that he had fighting for his country.

He was taking part in the relay, he said, on behalf of all War Amps, including the young children, The Champs, whose courage and spirit he found inspiring as they learned to adjust to their new limbs.

Due to some confusion about where he would be passed the torch, more than 40 of Rescorl's family and friends waited to cheer him on at Navy Hall, and were saddened to learn, too late, that his turn came along Queen Street, fittingly enough leading up to the NOTL Cenotaph.

But although Rescorl was disappointed not to see his family as he carried the torch, the camaraderie on the shuttle from other torch carriers and the support from Kimberly Ribble, a 2000 Olympian who represented Canada in the sport of judo, helped to make the day a positive experience."


For his friends and family, I have a video of Mr.Rescorl proudly holding high Canada's Olympic Torch as he passed by the Cenotaph in Niagara-on-the-Lake, on Dec.20, 2009.

Thank you, Sir.
For more photos of Day 52 (Niagara's portion) of the Olympic Torch Run, see the official Vancouver 2010 website here.

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Another GreenScam snowjob

Post-ClimateGate, perhaps now is good time to review some of the GreenFearTM spread in the St.Catharines Standard this year.
Perhaps the Standard's revered Green Team can re-examine their corporate-Canoeist-colleague Vivian Song's "Green Planet" story in the Apr.15, 2009 St.Catharines Standard, "Weather vs. Climate".
Song does a great job of spreading climate fear by pretending, with 'smug condescension' , that she's not (...y'all got that?!).
Song lectures us on the difference between climate and weather; wow - what's next? A lecture on a note's place within a symphonic score? A letter's place in the alphabet? A word's place in a book? A book's place in a library?? An Al Gore book's place in pile of crap?
Song's article, sub-headed "One snowstorm or heat wave does not prove or disprove climate change" interestingly/strangely spins the 'climate change' story without ever mentioning its relationship to AGW, man-made global warming: which is the spin preferred by the GreenFearmongers.
'Climate change' has become a subliminal synonym for AGW, conveying an underlying (yet unproven) message that there is a causal link; as if climate change couldn't and didn't occur prior to the ascent of man. (We all know, don't we, of the standard greenshevik dogma that George Bush personally caused Hurricame Katrina; yet, that Obama had nothing at all to do with the December blizzard on the American east coast?!)
Song writes her story as a supposed "public-service announcement", attempting to establish the idea that snow-storm or heat-wave weather extremes shouldn't be grounds for "climate-change-related discussion". Hm... well, this kinda sounds good - until you read the rest of the story!
Song helps trot out the usual dire predictions/warnings/fear/given truths (??!) that "warmer temperatures mean more moisture and evaporation - fuel for storms", based on blusterings from Environment Canada's David Phillips --- yes, Canada's Cagey Climatologist!
Song calls Phillips "loquacious and perhaps the most passionate climatologist in Canada", which perhaps, might be the problem in basing an entire story solely on Phillips' climate/weather interpretations.
Being' loquacious', Phillips apparently is more than pleased to let Song report that we should 'expect more tornadoes, drought and flash flooding, extreme weather patterns that afflict the U.S. which we're likely to inherit.'
So: how'd that inheritance work out?
[When was this likely to occur? How likely was this to occur? Song doesn't mention asking Phillips that.] Will Song or the St.Catharines Standard bother to do a follow-up story examining Phillips' climate claims?
When Song writes of cold-snaps being used as "ammunition that climate change is a hoax", what is she actually saying: that 'climate change' - defined as AGW - IS man made; and therefore, cannot be a hoax?
Is this Song's underlying presumption?
Will Song now revisit her assumptions of what constitutes a hoax in light of the CRU ClimateGate scandal?
Is the often-sourced Dave Phillips the only go-to-guy in Canada for 'climate-change' explanations/predictions?
Is a climatologist, whose idea that weather (or is it climate?) is a "crap shoot" (see here), really a good sole source of information?
Has Song, or anyone, actually bothered to examine Phillips' record on the issue of AGW, around which, of course, the entire political question of "climate change" revolves?
Song writes: "A warmer climate will also bring more "wildcards" in the weather system, Phillips says, or increased variability"; yet Song doesn't quite get around to asking Phillips to cite his scientific sources.
"Increased variability"?
Where are Phillips' citations??
Are "wildcard" and  "crap shoot official climatologist lingo, dumbed down for the Joe Niagaras of the world?
Is the wildcard crapshoot climate gospel of Phillips simply proof in itself?
And what is it a proof of, anyway?! Certainly not of AGW - or are we we supposed to assume this confirms AGW by subliminal GreenFearTM osmosis?
Song writes "Canada can expect to see an increasing frequency of "high impact" incidents, Phillips says".
"High impact" eh? Compared to WHAT, exactly???!!! Based on what? When? Where, exactly?
The 'reporter' Vivian Song DOES NOT REPORT these details!!'
"One of the things climatologists used to say is that the last 100 years of weather data will be the story of our future since weather repeats itself" Phillips says.
Song doesn't report which climatologists Phillips was referring to.
"But I don't believe that anymore," Phillips says.
Cagey David Phillips 'doesn't believe'  WHAT?? In the last 100 years of "weather data"? Or that weather repeats itself? Or that past patterns are - or are not - the story of the future?
What DOES Phillips believe? What is he actually saying?
Song doesn't report asking him.
Does Cagey Climatologist David Phillips now believe in what - a thousand-year trend of weather-data? A ten-year trend?  A ten-day trend? WHAT?
A trend sourced where?? From the loquacious, deck-stacking, wildcard crapshooters at the CRU?!
"Changes are happening so rapidly" says Phillips.
"So rapidly"?
How rapidly? When? At what rate? Based on what data?! Have rapid changes in weather never occurred on earth?!
Song doesn't report asking Phillips about that.
What exactly is Canada's supposed-SENIOR CLIMATOLOGIST actually saying in Song's interview, for Gore's sake?!
Song doesn't quite ask. Just quoting whatever drips outta Phillips' mouth is enough, apparently.
Has anybody from Sun Media, or from the St. Catharines Standard, bothered to ask Mr. Senior Climatologist Phillips lately to comment on the GreenSCAMTM revelations of ClimateGate?
Conveniently, depending on what you might glean from Phillips' glib statements, maybe AGW is 'climate change', maybe it isn't!!

It would be helpful to know what scientific evidence does Canada's Senior Climatologist David Phillips have to show that AGW is directly linked to 'climate change'?
(Is it the same "science" which is still-not-yet-revealed by climatalarmist TM (here) Liberal MPP Jim Bradley?!)

Song launched an offensive, all right... what's overdue is a frank post-Jokenhagen, post-ClimateGate follow-up with Phillips, minus the snowjob.

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Liberal Jim Bradley celebrates Global Warming

Ontario Liberal MPP Jim Bradley's closed Secord Ave. office is ablaze with light late on Dec.21, 2009, in celebration (?) of the Winter Solstice. Yeh, that's it!
Jim Bradley's name glared onto the empty street, into a dark, freezing cold night, proudly demonstrating that a caring Jim is environmentally friendly and sensitive to the um... reality of umm... yeah: global warming.
As Bradley's Liberal scumbag colleague MPP John Gerretsen arrives back in Ontario after sliming Alberta and Saskatchewan over at the Jokenhagen ClimateFest, energy-saver Jim Bradley lovingly leaves the lights on, to show Gerrestsen the way home.
A positively touching message from the hypocritical Savant of Secord Ave.: The Liberal's lights are on, but no-one's home.
Al Gore and Prince Chuckie of Wales will be proud.

Saturday, December 19, 2009

McCallum's Liberal Poop-O-Gram contradicts Iggy

below: More Liberal Poop-O-Gram propaganda was mailed on Dec.18, 2009 to Niagara residents, this time from Liberal MP John McCallum.
When McCallum bleats on about 'wasted opportunity' and 'record deficits' and 'pork-barrel projects', McCallum is actually describing his Liberal Ontario buddies Deceptive Dalton McGuinty and Disastrous Dwight Duncan.
Ontario's children are being saddled with McGuinty's abusive Liberal deficits, John.Compare McCallum's deficit-propaganda to Ignatieff's so-called priorities, in David Akin's story "I'll put jobs before deficit, Ignatieff says; Party differences; Unemployment should be tackled first, leader says" (Canwest News Service, Dec.19, 2009, here):

“Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff says fighting unemployment is more important than eliminating the federal deficit.
In an exclusive year-end interview with Canwest News Service and Global National, Mr. Ignatieff said that, should he become prime minister, he would be prepared to divert federal resources to job creation even if that meant Canada would remain in deficit beyond 2015, the year when the Conservative government believes Canada will be close to eliminating its budget deficit.
"If I'm prime minister, I'm going to be looking at the unemployment numbers first and deficit second," Mr. Ignatieff said during the interview at Stornoway, the official Opposition leader's residence.
Mr. Ignatieff said the approach to deficit reduction will be one of the key choices voters will have between his party and the governing Conservatives.
"They think the deficit's the only issue you have to worry about and we're saying unemployment's the issue you have to worry about," Mr. Ignatieff said. "That's a differentiator." The point is crucial because it will be one of the key issues Liberals will be looking at when they assess Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's 2010 budget, likely to be introduced as early as late next month. Both the NDP and Bloc Quebecois voted against the 2009 budget but the government survived because the Liberals voted in favour of it.
But Mr. Ignatieff would not be pinned down on what it will take for his party to support the next budget.
"We're dealing with the Conservative Party of Canada here," Mr. Ignatieff said.
"We're dealing with Stephen Harper [and his] capacity for poison pills, for game-playing, for omnibus budget bills that freight in some other thing that you never even saw coming. I've been around long enough to know I'm not telling you what I'm going to do because I've got to look at this thing and see what it is."
Moreover, Mr. Ignatieff said it is the government's responsibility, not the Opposition's, to propose a plan to eliminate the deficit that it created.
"They don't have a plan to get us out of deficit. So the burden is not on me -- I'm in the Opposition -- they've got to give Canadians a credible plan on deficit reduction and they don't have any."
Mr. Ignatieff argues Canada has the luxury to extend the amount of time it takes to regain its budgetary balance because of the fiscal foundations laid down by the previous Liberal governments of Jean Chretien and Paul Martin.
And he blamed the Conservatives for what he characterized as frittering away the $12-billion surplus they inherited from Mr. Martin's administration in 2006.
The latest projections from the Finance Department indicate the deficit this year will be about $56-billion, the largest in Canadian history. By 2014-2015, finance officials predict the deficit will be down to $5.2-billion.
Mr. Ignatieff said that relative to the size of the Canadian economy, those deficit numbers are not as serious as they were when Mr. Chretien took over from former prime minister Brian Mulroney in 1993.
For the fiscal year that ended in 1993, the federal deficit was $41-billion but that represented 5.9% of the country's gross domestic product, the sum of all economic activity.
This year, the deficit will be about 3.6% of GDP. By 2015, it will be down to 0.3%.
But opposition critics, as well as some private sector economists, say Mr. Flaherty's fiscal outlook is partly based on employment insurance premiums remaining artificially high over the next five years and that, Mr. Ignatieff said, amounts to a payroll tax.
"And every employer, especially the small ones, we talk to say this is a job killer. So one of the big issues we've got is -- yeah, we've got to get back into balance but is the smart way to do that to raise payroll taxes which will kill jobs?"
Mr. Ignatieff said his government would consider incentive programs for employers that might reward them with a break on payroll taxes for every new job.
"Prudent fiscal management, good structural investment that creates jobs -- my sense is that the trade-off is: do you focus on the unemployment problem or do you focus on the deficit problem? We focus on the unemployment problem and we think we can pay down the deficit on a different gradient.""
Let's see: Iggy (the flip-flopper who less than a year ago demanded that the Canadian government spend spend spend: more, faster!!) now wants us to think that only Iggy cares about unemployment; Iggy now says he wants to focus on unemployment, rather than on the deficit - yet out-of-touch Liberal MP John McCallum nevertheless sends another stinking Liberal POOP-O-GRAM to Niagara, whining ABOUT THE DEFICIT !!


Can't you get your shit together, McCallum - did you even bother to run your idiotic Liberal propaganda past Iggy first? This just re-affirms the out-of-touch arrogance of Ignatieff's poopy, incompetent Liberals.

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

ObamaCare warning: here's your future, Sickos

ObamaCare single-payer, universal, government-run health care fanatics might want to see the kind of typical bureaucratic political bullshit which will come into play when your government takes sole control of your health care choices.

Look no further than Ontario, Canada, where a morally and financially bankrupt despotic Liberal government imposes its health care monopoly on a trapped population, resulting - despite what socialists want you to think - in higher costs, more cuts, more shortages, coverage de-listing, increasing taxes, and longer wait times.

The following is yet another typical reality (which socialist Obamanites will immediately dismiss as 'anecdotal'!) of the on-going crisis in Ontario's sad health care monopoly, a reality which might soon be coming to a state near you; don't say you weren't warned:

Maria Babbage (CP, Dec.17, 2009, here) wrote in "Hospital funding freeze means longer lineups, paying for services: critics":

"Ontario residents should expect to pay upfront for more health-care services and endure longer lineups if the Liberal government makes good on its threat to freeze funding for hospitals next year, critics said Thursday.

Health Minister Deb Matthews is warning hospitals to brace for a possible budget freeze this spring because the province is grappling with a $24.7-billion deficit - the largest in its history.

The most hospitals can hope for is an increase below last year's 2.1 per cent boost - less than inflation - which critics say is so meagre it has already forced hospitals to close beds and cut services.

No matter how Matthews tries to spin it, a budget freeze amounts to a service cut because hospitals won't be able to meet rising costs, said NDP Leader Andrea Horwath.

The Liberals have already wasted millions of dollars in their bungled attempt to create electronic health records, she said.

"It makes people shake their head with disgust when they hear things like frozen hospital budgets and zero per cent increases on one hand, and on the other hand, they see the eHealth boondoggle - a billion dollars out the door with very little to show for it," she said.

Tom Closson, president of the Ontario Hospital Association, downplayed the possibility of a funding freeze as "highly speculative."

The OHA is "optimistic" that hospitals will see a funding increase of about two per cent in the next provincial budget, which is expected in May, he said.

"This is a very unusual economic challenge that this government is facing," Closson said.

More than a third of Ontario hospitals - 61 in total - couldn't balance their books last year, amounting to a $154-million shortfall.

Hospitals are forbidden from running deficits by law, but many received waivers because they've agreed to balance their books.

The number of hospitals swimming in red ink will only grow if the government starves them of much-needed cash, critics say.

Some hospitals are already on financial life support and borrowing heavily to meet payroll and pay their bills, said Natalie Mehra, executive director of the Ontario Health Coalition.

A funding freeze means patients will be forced to travel further for health care, wait longer for a hospital bed and may even have to fork over cash for services, she said.

"It means that we'll likely see attempts to close more of the small and rural hospitals," she said.

"It means that more services like physiotherapy will be cut and people will have to pay out of pocket for them ... It means longer lineups in the ERs because there's not enough hospital beds."

Premier Dalton McGuinty vowed in October to help cash-strapped hospitals through tough economic times, but there are signs that a freeze on hospital funding is imminent.

A spokesman for Lakeridge Health Network, which runs three hospitals and three specialty sites in east-central Ontario, refused to comment Thursday on how a funding freeze would affect its services.

But in an earlier interview, CEO Kevin Empey suggested that it would be unwise for hospitals to expect a bigger funding increase than last year.

"The signals from the government are: plan for zero per cent next year," he said.

Niagara Health System, which had the biggest deficit last year of $18.8 million, put together a plan to reduce that shortfall to $3 million by 2013. The system has seven hospital sites.

But that plan, which was approved by local health officials, assumes a three per cent increase in funding each year, said hospital spokeswoman Caroline Bourque Wiley. Every one per cent change represents a $3-million impact to its budget.

The hospital's plan for next year assumes a two per cent increase and no service cuts, she said. It "would not be responsible" to speculate about what service reductions would be required if the funding increase falls below that target, she added.

"The government usually provides guidance months ahead of its budget on how much funding hospitals can expect to receive, so they can draft operating plans for the upcoming year. That didn't happen this year, Closson said.

Instead, hospitals were instructed to draft plans using three different scenarios - a funding freeze, a one per cent increase and a two per cent increase - and submit those plans by Dec. 15, he said.

"I can understand the challenge (the government's) facing: do you really want to get a number out before you have good information on what it's likely to be next year for them in terms of revenue?" Closson said.

"But having said that, the longer they wait, the more difficult it is going to be for hospitals to balance their budgets next year. And the more costly."

The Liberals shouldn't be able to plead poverty after foisting a health tax of up to $900 per person on Ontario taxpayers, said Progressive Conservative health critic Christine Elliott.

"The reality will be that a lot of hospitals are going to have to start cutting services to the public, and that's directly in contrast to what the minister originally said," Elliott said in an interview.

"I think taxpayers have every right to be outraged about this."

Ontario's 159 public hospitals receive about 85 per cent of their funding from the province through 14 Local Health Integration Networks, which were set up by the Liberals three years ago to make local health-care decisions and dispense government cash."
Some 13 million trapped Ontarians HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE but to suffer under whatever scheme the morally and financially bankrupt Liberal premier scumbag Dalton McGuinty decides to dole out. While American sickos such as Michael Moore and the Democratic ObamaCare crowd make noise with their agitation for more state health care control, giddily pointing to Canada, promising illusions of supposed "savings", all these people should look at what's really happening in Ontario's overrated health-care-Utopia: costs CONTINUE to RISE, and care is rationed - WHILE THE GOVERNMENT arbitrarily RAISES taxes and CUTS services!!! Ontarians are forced to travel to the States for timely health care, here, which is often unavailable here in Ontario's government-run health monopoly.
(See also here for an overview of the last several years of the Ontario government's Liberal health care duplicity)

The Jokenhagen Greenmailers

There are two more good reads on the GreenidiotTM climatalarmistTM GreenmailersTM, plying their GreenFearTM over at the JokenhagenTM Climate Shakedown:
Peter Foster's story, "Canada's Galileo government" (National Post, Dec.16, 2009, here)
Charles Krauthammer's story, "The new socialism", (National Post, Dec.14, 2009, here). Krauthammer continues on the subject of the new green bolshevism I wrote of here, on Apr.6, 2008, the Reds' Green Show: Into the heart of darkness.
What a laugh it was to see ole Prince of Wales Charles upchucking his climate fearmongering at the Copenhagen Climate Coven. This is the same bag of Royal Hot Air who visited Niagara on the Lake recently, arriving in a fleet of limousines and leaving in an entourage of five helicopters - what a hypocrite.
And why is it surprising (see here; here) to see the Liberal party of Michael Ignatieff and St.Catharines Grit candidate Andrew Gill posting a photo on their website of Canada's Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, being assassinated?! This is not the first time Liberal extremists have done this: see here, here.
This Liberal smarminess - that the killing of Canada's elected prime minister, or any political opponent, is funny - was a sad low mark for Stephane Bumbledore Dion's leadership - and is now yet another ignoble demonstration of Iggy's iffy standards.

Monday, December 14, 2009

This holiday, infect someone with Al Gore!

Will there be more GreenshevikTM climate fearmongering garbage spewed at the St.Catharines Standard?
Well: Of Course!
We were treated to a laughable Dec.14, 2009 editorial by a clearly biased Paul Berton, "Climate conference allows us to breath a little easier", who takes as gospel "the noise" from global warming fearmongers such as Al Gore. I guess it depends which "scientific community" Berton shills for, when he claims in this Copenhagen-copout piece, that people are replacing their home windows because of so-called climate change - more specifically AGW: as if this was never done before David Suzuki's climatalarmistsT M began their climate fear campaign! Berton spews tedious, grasping connections, ignoring that his basis of argument, AGW, has not been proven. Berton also trots out the predictable, the usual - well... by now, obligatory! - fearmongering crap about "exponential human population" and "our predilection for excessive consumerism". Berton dismisses, as did Ontario's premier global warming liar, Liberal MPP Jim Bradley, those who question the GreenshevikTM pseudo-science-based AGW agenda. Berton and Bradley and Suzuki and Gore can't possibly be the ones causing a dishonest racket with their persistent, ignorant warmism, can they?!
And there was the other St.Catharines Standard GreenFearTM column (Dec.14, 2009, with Tiffany Mayer, of the hilarious "Green Team" climate change propaganda column, which, apparently, is geared for brain-dead average Joe Niagaras), titled "Finding gifts in the right shade of green"!
Oh, my - How Precious!!! The 'right shade of green'! How wonnerful and thoughtful, from these FLICKING Bertonoid consumerists, "doing right by the planet"! Ahh: soooo Cute!!
Mayer, naturally, pays predictable homage to climate change scumbag fear-mongerer Al Gore, shilling his new book, not even questioning its contents. Why bother!? Al Gore is the Font of All Knowledge, the personified Oracle of Truth - Pure and Shining and Good, to AGW-infected-climatalarmistsTM, who are predisposed to gobble up Al Gore's bullshit with relish, regurgitating it to try to infect others as well.
The Standard's so-called environmental column is a bullhorn of recycled bullshit, truly a waste of newsprint. Gosh - the St.Catharines Standard's Green Team GreenFearTM reporter/propagandist couldn't even critically analyze the book she recommends as a gift. She couldn't bring herself to specify whether Gore's book can be found in the science-fiction or in the religion section of your favorite bookshop...
Good Gaia - what is it with you people asking about content and substance all the time?
All ya need to know, Joe, is that an all-caring, all-knowing, all-seeing Al Gore magnanimously wrote his garbage on recycled paper - isn't that enough?!?

Sunday, December 13, 2009

Copenhagen's Greenshevik Shakedown

Hey lookie: the secularists at the Toronto Red Socialist Tsar have found a way to wrap their greenshevismTM in religion! This is a precious example of co opting and perverting religion to justify the CopenhaganistTM warmists "bioneering" propaganda - see Stephen Scharper's skewed climatalarmismTM here. It's fun stuff to read; the smug spin is great! This is the similar kind of drumbeat heard from Jane Hanlon, or, from David Miller, the embarrassing scumbag socialist soon-not-to-be-mayor of Toronto, see here, also here.

Funnier yet is the St.Catharines Standard's pre-CopenhaganistTM campaign, unabashedly shilling for the GreenshevikTM climatalarmistsTM, such as their Dec.7, 2009 propaganda piece "UN: Climate talks must deliver", written by John Archer and Anna Ringstrom.

We can't forget the St.Catharines Standard's resident Obama asslick, Lisa Van Dusen, who in her fine Dec.9, 2009 column "Obama's Nobel search for peace", can't tell us what Obama actually did to earn his laughable "prize", yet...

(btw, where's Kanye when you need him, to rush the stage and do his there's-someone-more-deserving-than-YOU shtick when Obama was accepting his 'prize'?!)

... nevertheless pins him up there with Mother Teresa (what an affront to Mother Teresa); Van Dusen also can't seem to understand that climatalarmistTM Al the Whore Gore was not (!) "prescient" but simply an opportunistic hoaxter.

Or how about Lisa Van Dusen's Dec.12, 2009 propaganda piece in the St.Catharines Standard, "Sarah Palin takes on Gore, Newton", another brilliant piece of smarmy GreenshevikTM crap. Funnnnnny that Van Scumbag can't show any evidence of AGW, in the same way that Jane Hanlon can't, or David Suzuki can't, or Barry O can't, or Stephane Dion can't - Van Dusen tries to spin climate change as being the same as AGW. Palin didn't 'take on Newton', as this St.Catharines Standard story purported: Lisa Van Scumbag spun it that way!! Van Scumbag simply took Al Whore's slanted strawman rhetoric as gospel! Y'all, lookit thare: dat pailin's all done been denient dat ther ole garvity done been zistent, hyuck, hyuck, hyuck..... oh, FLICK-off, Van Scumbag!! What a joke. (see also here)

Take the time to compare Van Dusen's GreenshevistTM propaganda in the St.Catharines Standard, to Peter Foster's same-subject, same-day, Dec.12, 2009, National Post column The Goracle speaks on Climategate, here. Comparing the two columns just shows the ridiculously biased propaganda Van Dusen weaves.

More CopenhaganistTM climate-fear-mongering and shakedown propaganda came in the St.Catharines Standard's Dec.11, 2009 issue, in a Reuters feed titled Money could derail talks, this time featuring no less than climate meister George Soros, looking like a NEW WORLD ORDER Bond villain - you just 'give' us... ohh... let's say... $100 billion... well - make it $300 billion... and the climate 'crisis' will be 'solved'... until next year!!

Also interesting was Maurice Vellacott's Dec.12, 2009 National Post column Fear depopulation, not overpopulation, here, in response to a bizarre Dec.8 article by the Post's Dianne Francis advocating that we all follow China's one child policy! WTF?

Francis' conversion to pushing NEW WORLD ORDER despotism reminds me of Ontario Liberal MPP Jim Bradley's long held NEW WORLD ORDER despotic beliefs (noted in Tom Spears column “Critical threats to the world’s existence”, Ottawa Citizen, back on Jul.21, 1991) on the supposed evils of overpopulation, see here; here .

We need more GreenFearTM industries - more abortions, more euthanasia; less babies, and less old people - after all, they cost our universal health care system too much, so this is as good a justification as any to have government health control - to SAVE THE PLANET, not to save people!

These pesky people emit Co2 - and Obama's GreenshirtsTM have just deemed Co2 a poison: therefore, it's a matter of time before the green bolsheviks begin to implement their real end game:

if you emit Co2, it's because YOU ARE ALIVE; because you are alive (and therefore emitting Co2) YOU ARE POISONING THE PLANET...

ya see where this is going, don't you...

... and because you are alive and breathing you are now automatically deemed by the government as being a DANGER TO MOTHER EARTH and guilty of ECO-TERRORISM, of plotting to KILL MOTHER NATURE - so, the best way to SAVE THE PLANET is for YOU NOT to be alive anymore.

Problem solved.

Save the planet by killing the people.

Wellll... not all the people... naturally, the GreensheviksTM and their agents, being the well-meaning saviours of MOTHER EARTH, would obviously be more valuable than the other sub-normal (as eugenicist Tommy Douglas put it) human mouth-breathers. [Gaia forbid that the GreenshevikTM climatalarmistsTM should put their money where their mouth is, and lead by example, doing the World a big favour, and themselves commit suicide to SAVE THE PLANET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That would prove climate-change exists - right?! And - they'd be HELPING THE PLANET, right?! One less GreenshevikTM a day keeps the icebergs from melting away?! ]

Yep - Peak Population will be the next area of leftist fear-mongering.

Isn't that what Al Whore really wants? Isn't that exactly what the subjects in Scharper's Red Tsar story earlier above want?

The NEW WORLD ORDER will have plenty of Green jobs, devising new crematoria in the NAME OF MOTHER EARTH, and better ways to sterilize male and female reproductive systems. Those fetuses which the GreenshevikTM World Government allows to be born, will be rationed a pre-calculated lifetime C02 emissions-limit along with their birth certificate - which would simultaneously become their pre-determined death certificate as well.

The Green bolsheviks will ration the time you are allowed to dance on Mother Gaia.

Orwell's and Huxley's political fantasies may soon become non-fiction horror documentaries.

Thursday, December 10, 2009

The 5% solution

Here's a bit from smarm-bag innuendo-master Finance Minister Dwight Duncan, the lying Liberal Dalton Sales Tax pusher, from the Dec.9, 2009 Queen's Park Question Period:

"Hon. Dwight Duncan: The Leader of the Opposition likes to quote a journalist who also believes in privatized health care. Is that your view as well? He likes to quote a journalist who believes in privatizing education. Is that your agenda? He likes to quote an economist who doesn't believe global warming is real. Is that your agenda as well? The Leader of the Opposition has no plan. He has no idea where to take this province.
Premier McGuinty has laid out a plan, a principle-based plan, that will improve incomes, improve job growth and help rebuild this province as we come out of the worst global downturn in many years. Premier McGuinty has laid out the plan. Mr. Hudak and his renegade band who seized the Legislature offer no ideas, no hope, no future. They're about the past. They're about privatization of health care and education. We fundamentally disagree with them, and I believe..."
Premier McGuinty is an unprincipled flicking liar, as is Ole Dunco.
Does Good Ole Dunco believe in... um... "global warming", you know, the way his BS-spouting Liberal colleague Jim Bradley believes in "global warming"?!
What are the sources of whatever it is which these Liberals deem to be "global warming"?Dunco's bankrupt Liberals have NO VISION for Ontario, except for MORE demagoguery and MORE debt.
Duncan's Liberal health care monopolists have cut health care, delisted previous coverage, and raised unprecedented amounts of new taxes. The ombudsman and auditor have found severe problems within McGuinty's Liberal-run health monopoly in Ontario. Patients from Duncan's own riding are exported to the States for emergency care which Duncan's Liberal health-monopolist hypocrites fail to provide at home.
Dwight Duncan should be ashamed of his Liberals' role (here) in crippling Ontario's health care system, when he trots out his smug, dismissive, duplicitous, fear-mongering rhetoric - precisely demonstrating exactly the kind of head-in-the-sand, debate-stifling bluster which Keith Martin wrote about here.
Duncan's stifling debate on all kinds of fronts - a typical authoritarian, arrogant, unaccountable
Now that McGuinty, Duncan, Bradley, and the rest of Ontario's ruling majority Liberal Liars have rammed through their new sales tax, the next election should be about LOWERING this tax to 5%.

Niagara's embarrassing climatalarmists

St.Catharines Standard reporter Matthew Van Dongen continued his pre-Copenhaganist assignment as local Niagara climate fearmongerer-enabler, this time in his laughable piece "Environmentalists call out Canada on climate change" (St.Catharines Standard, Dec.10, 2009):

"Jane Hanlon hopes bickering world nations can reach a carbon- cutting agreement at climate talks this week in Copenhagen.

But failing that, she hopes Canada is benched for not being a team player.

"I hope we're slapped with economic sanctions until we agree to cut our carbon emissions for real," said Hanlon, who heads the local advocacy group Climate Action Niagara.

"We seem to have no intention of living up to our previous Kyoto (emission-cutting) obligations, let alone setting new goals ... it makes me embarrassed to be a Canadian."

The climate summit, which began Dec. 7, is meant to find a successor treaty to the Kyoto Accord among 192 countries. Most of the debate revolves around setting binding targets on carbon emissions, thought by a majority of scientists to be responsible for a harmful warming of the atmosphere.

The federal Conservatives aim to lower Canada's greenhouse gases 20% from 2006 levels by 2020, with the U. S. pitching a similar target.

However, Canada faces criticism from environmentalists and even other countries for not doing enough.

The EU, for example, has pitched reducing harmful gas emissions by 20% compared to 1990 levels.

Well-known Lincoln environmentalist Liz Benneian said she'd like to see Canada be a leader in the battle against global warming, "not a global embarrassment."

"We're quickly losing time here," said Benneian, who noted scientists are already finding evidence of damaging climate change around the world. "It's a simple question we have to answer: do we love our children enough to leave them a livable world?"

Before the Copenhagen conference even began, several world leaders suggested a firm commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would be unlikely at the summit.

But the conference runs until Dec. 18 and both Benneian and Hanlon still hold out hope for a wide-reaching agreement.

United Nations climate chief Yvo de Boer said on Wednesday Canada was "negotiating very constructively." Canada also decided to send to the summit ambassador and former Manitoba Premier Gary Doer, a strong supporter of the Kyoto Accord.

Milica Njegovan believes home-front pressure is forcing politicians to take the summit seriously.

"So many international groups are engaged, so many small movements are working in concert at home and in Copenhagen," said the co-ordinator for the Ontario Public Interest Research Group at Brock University.

"I think that's fabulous and I think it really is making a difference."
Ahh, Jane Hanlon and Liz Benneian - now there's a couple of embarrassing local GreenFear-spreading climatalarmists for you - reporter/enabler Van Dongen simply regurgitates without question the skewed mantra that these people spout. Van Dongen couldn't be bothered to give any background about or ask any questions of OPIRG, either.

It's not surprising that a bitter Hanlon would spew the line that she wishes Canadians should suffer economic harm if we don't bow to her climate cabal's warmist views.

Hanlon and Benneian may believe that they are spreading hope and change; but they are infecting us with a deluded hoax and its resultant pain. It's like ClimateGate is irrelevant to the agents of warmist propaganda - or to the reporters who should be asking questions about it.

Compare Van Dongen's sorry greenie ass-licking piece to Lorne Gunter's column here, "The Skeleton of Climate Change" (National Post, Dec.9, 2009)

Compare Van Dongen's blatant lack of journalistic pretention in his Hanlon ad/thinly-disguised 'news report', to, say, Bret Stephens' story here, "The Totalities of Copenhagen" (Wall Street Journal, Dec.7, 2009).

Stephens writes of the underlying totalitarian impulse of the global warming true believers:

"This is not to say that global warming true believers are closet Stalinists. But their intellectual methods are instructively similar. Consider:

• Revolutionary fervor: There's a distinct tendency among climate alarmists toward uncompromising radicalism, a hatred of "bourgeois" values, a disgust with democratic practices. So President Obama wants to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 83% from current levels by 2050, levels not seen since the 1870s—in effect, the Industrial Revolution in reverse. Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, insists that "our lifestyles are unsustainable." Al Gore gets crowds going by insisting that "civil disobedience has a role to play" in strong-arming governments to do his bidding. (This from the man who once sought to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.)

• Utopianism: In the world as it is, climate alarmists see humanity hurtling toward certain doom. In the world as it might be, humanity has seen the light and changed its patterns of behavior, becoming the green equivalent of the Soviet "new man." At his disposal are technologies that defy the laws of thermodynamics. The problems now attributed to global warming abate or disappear.

• Anti-humanism: In his 2007 best seller "The World Without Us," environmentalist Alan Weisman considers what the planet would be like without mankind, and finds it's no bad thing. The U.N. Population Fund complains in a recent report that "no human is genuinely 'carbon neutral'"—its latest argument against children. John Holdren, President Obama's science adviser, cut his teeth in the policy world as an overpopulation obsessive worried about global cooling. But whether warming or cooling, the problem for the climate alarmists, as for other totalitarians, always seems to boil down to the human race itself.

• Intolerance: Why did the scientists at the heart of Climategate go to such lengths to hide or massage the data if truth needs no defense? Why launch campaigns of obstruction and vilification against gadfly Canadian researchers Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick if they were such intellectual laughingstocks? It is the unvarying habit of the totalitarian mind to treat any manner of disagreement as prima facie evidence of bad faith and treason.

• Monocausalism: For the anti-Semite, the problems of the world can invariably be ascribed to the Jews; for the Communist, to the capitalists. And as the list above suggests, global warming has become the fill-in-the-blank explanation for whatever happens to be the problem.

• Indifference to evidence: Climate alarmists have become brilliantly adept at changing their terms to suit their convenience. So it's "global warming" when there's a heat wave, but it's "climate change" when there's a cold snap. The earth has registered no discernable warming in the past 10 years: Very well then, they say, natural variability must be the cause. But as for the warming that did occur in the 1980s and 1990s, that plainly was evidence of man-made warming. Am I missing something here?

• Grandiosity: In "SuperFreakonomics," Steve Levitt and Stephen Dubner give favorable treatment to an idea to cool the earth by pumping sulfur dioxide into the upper atmosphere, something that could be done cheaply and quickly. Maybe it would work, or maybe it wouldn't. But one suspects that the main reason the chapter was the subject of hysterical criticism is that it didn't propose to deal with global warming by re-engineering the world economy. The penchant for monumentalism is yet another constant feature of the totalitarian mind.

Today, of course, the very idea of totalitarianism is considered passé. Yet the course of the 20th century was defined by totalitarian regimes, and it would be dangerous to assume that the habits of mind that sustained them have vanished into the mists. In Copenhagen, they are once again at play - and that, comrades, is no accident."
Is it an accident that St.Catharines Standard reporter Matthew Van Dongen is unable, or, unwilling, to bring himself to present an unbiased view of his greenshevik-infected subjects?
This was no accident: this type of GreenFear propaganda was purposefully sought out and moulded by the Standard's editors to fit the St. Catharines Standard's "it's all settled" Liberal green agenda.
This story was totalitarian propaganda, pure green fascism, promulgated willingly in Niagara by the phony "free press".