The Ruthless Truth blog

Hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops to remain stationed at dozens of U.S. military bases throughout the country

by Paul Joseph Watson

Global Research, July 1, 2009

Prison Planet – 2009-06-30

The corporate media is getting all giddy and affording blanket coverage to the story of Iraqis who are “regaining their sovereignty” as U.S. troops are pulled out from Iraqi cities. This is of course lurid and baseless propaganda – hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops will remain in Iraq stationed at the dozens of military bases that have been built across the country.

“As of now, there are approximately 130,000 U.S. military personnel in Iraq. Most of the U.S. soldiers that had been deployed in Iraqi cities are being returned to garrison elsewhere in country. The United States Air Force controls Iraq’s airspace. The United States Navy controls Iraq’s territorial waters,” points out the Cryptogon blog.

“Sovereignty: No. Propaganda: Yes.”

After the “official” full withdrawal date of 2011, which Admiral Mike Mullen has indicated isn’t even guaranteed, “Mr. Obama plans to leave behind a “residual force” of tens of thousands of troops to continue training Iraqi security forces, hunt down foreign terrorist cells and guard American institutions,” reported the New York Times back in February.

“Residual force” is a euphemism for “occupying army,” since only the most stupidly naive could ever believe that Iraq is now nothing more than a subservient client state of the new world order empire.

A senior military officer spelled it out more plainly to the Los Angeles Times, “When President Obama said we were going to get out within 16 months, some people heard, ‘get out,’ and everyone’s gone. But that is not going to happen,” the officer said.

Indeed, at the last count which took place nearly three years ago, the U.S. military had already built no less than 55 fully functional military bases in Iraq, with funding in place to build many more.

Furthermore, U.S. troops aren’t even leaving the cities altogether. Reports confirm that U.S. tanks will continue to patrol the areas outside of the “green zone” and the airport in Baghdad. The streets of major cities will still be patrolled by U.S.-trained Iraqi soldiers manning checkpoints everywhere harassing people for ID. In addition, if the Iraqis “request help” from U.S. troops to undertake security procedures, they’ll be right back on the streets just as before.

Iraqis themselves are not fooled by the charade. As the New York Times admits, the “celebrations” today “seemed contrived”, “Police cars were festooned with plastic flowers, and signs celebrating “independence day” were tied to blast walls and fences around the city. On Monday, night a festive evening celebration in Zahra Park with singers and entertainers drew primarily young men, many of them off-duty police officers,” according to the report.

“There is no doubt this is not national sovereignty because the Americans will stay inside Iraq in military bases,” said Najim Salim, 40, a teacher in Basra. “But the government wants to convince the citizens that there is a withdrawal of foreign troops, although the government could not protect citizens in some cities in Iraq even with the presence of U.S. forces.”

According to Websters dictionary, “sovereignty” is defined as “freedom from external control”.

Anyone who believes that Iraq is a sovereign country and has “freedom from external control,” or will ever achieve it while hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops are stationed at dozens of bases throughout the country, probably still believes that Saddam was hiding weapons of mass destruction.

Paul Joseph Watson is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Paul Joseph Watson

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Israel Kidnaps Peace Boat Crew

by Paul Craig Roberts

.

Global Research, July 1, 2009

CounterPunch

On June 30, the government of Israel committed an act of piracy when the Israeli Navy in international waters illegally boarded the “Spirit of Humanity,” kidnapped its 21-person crew from 11 countries, including former US Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and Nobel Laureate Mairead MaGuire, and confiscated the cargo of medical supplies, olive trees, reconstruction materials, and children’s toys that were on the way to the Mediterranean coast of Gaza. The “Spirit of Humanity,” along with the kidnapped 21 persons, is being towed to Israel as I write.

Gaza has been described as the “world’s largest concentration camp.” It is home to 1.5 million Palestinians who were driven by force of American-supplied Israeli arms out of their homes, off their farms, and out of their villages so that Israel could steal their land and make the Palestinian land available to Israeli settlers.

What we have been witnessing for 60 years is a replay in modern times, despite the United Nations and laws strictly preventing Israel’s theft of Palestine, of the 17th, 18th, and 19th century theft of American Indian lands by US settlers. An Israeli government spokesman recently rebuked the President of the United States, a country, the Israeli said, who stole all of its land from Indians, for complaining about Israel’s theft of Palestine.

I knew the “Spirit of Humanity” would fall to Israeli piracy the minute I received on June 25 from an official of an Israeli peace organization a “public advisory” that the government of Cyprus had withheld permission for the “Spirit of Humanity” to leave for Gaza. The US State Department had advised that “The Israeli Foreign Ministry informed U.S. officials at the American Embassy in Tel Aviv that Israel still considers Gaza an area of conflict and that any boats attempting to sail to Gaza will not be permitted to reach its destination.” The “Spirit of Humanity” obtained permission to leave Cyprus when all aboard signed a waiver absolving Cyprus of all responsibility for the crew’s safety at the hands of the Israelis.

As President Obama has called for humanitarian aid to be sent to Gaza, and as the International Red Cross has damned the inhumanity of Israel’s blockade of Gaza, the question that immediately comes to mind is why did not the United States send sufficient US Navy escort to see the “Spirit of Humanity” safely through international waters to Gaza? We send ships against Somalian pirates, why not against Israeli ones?

We all know the answer. The US talks a good “human rights” game, but never delivers–especially if the human rights abuser is Israel. After all, Israel owns the US Congress and President Obama. Israel even has an Israeli citizen and former member of the Israeli Defense Forces as the Chief-of-Staff in Obama’s White House. Israel owns millions of American “Christian Zionists” and “rapture evangelicans.” When it comes to Israel, the American government is a puppet state. It does what it is told.

Macho Americans might stand tall, but not when Israel snaps its fingers.

Israel, of course, will get away with a mere act of piracy. After all, Israel has been getting away with its war crimes and violations of international law for 60 years. If the UN tries to do anything, the US will veto it, as the US has done for decades.

What will happen to the kidnapped foreign nationals? Most likely they will be released and sent back to their respective countries. Israel, of course, will keep the stolen “Spirit of Humanity” to foreclose any further attempts by human rights activists to run Israel’s inhumane blockade of Gaza.

On the other hand, Israel might declare its captives to be terrorists on the ground that the Gazans elected in a free election Hamas as their government. Hamas, unlike Israel, is declared to be a terrorist organization by the puppet American State Department in Washington. Thus the human rights activists onboard the “Spirit of Humanity” are aiding and abetting terrorists by delivering goods to them. The US Department of Justice (sic) prosecutes American citizens and charities for sending aid to Palestinians on the grounds that Palestinians, if not everyone a terrorist, are governed by terrorists.

I wouldn’t be surprised if a Nobel Laureate and a former member of the US House of Representatives, along with the rest of the crew, are handed over to the Americans for indefinite detention and for torturing and waterboarding in the American torture facility at Bagram. I am certain that “Homeland Security” and the US Government are desperate to be rid of all of critics, and knocking off a Nobel Laureate and a member of the House sets a precedent for getting rid of the rest of us.

Meanwhile, California, which has become a failed state, has been denied bailout money from Washington. Israel, which has been a failed state for 60 years, can, unlike the American state of California, always count of Washington to deliver the money and the weapons to keep Israel going.

The same week that “our” government in Washington told the Governor of California “not one red cent,” President Barak Obama handed over $2.775 billion to Israel.

Online Journal (June 29) reported that the handover to Israel of the unemployed Americans’ tax dollars took place in a “tiny Capitol room” to which members of the press were denied access. I mean, really, who wants the media writing about US taxpayer dollars for Israel’s nuclear weapons while Americans are being kicked out of their homes. Not that, of course, the “Christian” supporters of Israel would mind.

Unlike every other recipient of US military largesse, Israel is permitted to bypass the Pentagon and to deal directly with US suppliers. Consequently, the Israel Lobby’s influence multiplies, because military suppliers fight for Israel in congressional committees in order to get Israel’s business. This lets Israel turn the screws on Iran. According to Grant F. Smith writing in Online Journal, Republican US Representative Mark Steven from Illinois has received $221,000 in campaign contributions from Israel political action committees (PACs). Therefore, it was a sure thing that he would introduce legislation preventing the Import-Export bank from providing loan guarantees to countries doing business with Iran.

Americans think that they are a superpower, but in fact they are a stupor-power. A puppet state if truth be known.

There is a great deal of evidence (see Jonathan Cook’s excellent piece) that Israel is a child abuser. “God’s Chosen People” routinely abuses captured Palestinian children. The Israelis also abuse Palestinian children by shooting them down in the streets.

Don’t take my word for it. The Geneva-based Defense for Children International says, according to Time Magazine, that “the ill-treatment and torture of Palestinian child prisoners appears to be widespread, systematic and institutionalized, suggesting complicity at all levels of the political and military chain of command.”

According to Time Magazine, “Often, children suffer lasting traumas from jail. Says Saleh Nazzal from the Palestinian Ministry of Prisoner Affairs, ‘When soldiers burst into a house and drag away a child, he loses his feeling of being protected by his family. He comes back from prison alienated from his family, his friends. They don’t like going back to school or even leaving the house. They start wetting their beds.’ Says Mona Zaghrout, a YMCA counselor who helps kids returning from prison: ‘They come out of prison thinking and acting like they are men. Their childhood is gone.’ And they often turn to another father figure–the armed militant groups fighting the Israeli occupation.’”

And so it goes. There’s no money for California, or for Americans’ health care, or for the several million Americans who have lost their homes and are homeless, because Israel needs it. Israel need the Americans’ taxpayers money to that it can create even more enemies, and, therefore, need more American money to spend with the American armament industries to oppress more Palestinians and to make more enemies, requiring more American money to protect Israel from its folly and its evil.

And the brainwashed American public goes along year after year.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com

Paul Craig Roberts is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Paul Craig Roberts

I think Mr. Roberts nailed it right there !!

UR

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Liquid Nitrogen TWKR Results

For our liquid nitrogen testing we insulated the motherboard with a combination of artist eraser and Vaseline and mounted our K|ngp|n F1EE liquid nitrogen pot on top of the CPU with a dab of Arctic Silver Ceramique for the thermal compound. After pulling the pot down to around -188 Celsius we began our runs starting with 3DMark 2006. We were using a Gigabyte MA790FXT-UD5P with two Corsair Dominator GT 1866C7 2GB modules, two AMD HD4870x2 video cards at 822MHz core 950MHz memory, and a single Corsair HX1000 PSU powering the entire system.

Next up we began testing for maximum frequency with all four cores enabled. We had to push the vcore up to 1.8v to achieve the following screenshot and it was only stable long enough to save the image before blue-screening. Regardless, this shows that with additional testing it should be possible to run 3DMark 2006 at a slightly faster frequency.

Unfortunately, we only have a few images of the system after we were finished benching. Just so everyone knows this board has had the pot pulled from it several dozen times and this particular time we were a bit rough with it. This is not normal to say the least; this is the first time we’ve seen this happen. Click the images for a larger resolution.

At the end of the day the AMD Phenom II 42 TWKR processor was a blast to play with. Compared to our two retail Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition processors the TWKR was around 100MHz higher through 3DMark06, but a whopping 300MHz higher with the CPU-Z max frequency. If we can source more LN2 it’d be interesting to see how each individual core performs but overall it is safe to say the TWKR will scale roughly 100MHz to 200MHz higher than the average retail Phenom II X4 955 no matter what cooling method you are using.
Reaching nearly 6.6GHz on a Phenom II X4 processor was an awesome experience and it just goes to show how far these cores can go with the right cooling. AMD has done a great job with the Phenom II processors and the TWKR edition processors really highlight that success.

Legit Reviews – AMD Phenom II 42 TWKR Black Edition Processor – Liquid Nitrogen TWKR Results

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

FEMA Administrator Fugate Meets Top Israeli Official To Discuss Emergency Management Issues

Release Date: June 30, 2009
Release Number: HQ-09-077a

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator Craig Fugate met today with Maj. Gen. Yair Golan of the Israeli Defense Forces Home Front Command (IDF/HFC), continuing to foster a working relationship with Israel and bolstering the exchange of information on common emergency management practices.

Administrator Fugate and Maj. General Golan will serve as co-chairs of an emergency management work group designed to discuss problems and issues and to exchange information on a variety of topics such as long-term community recovery, exercise programs, policies and procedures.

"I look forward to working with my Israeli counterpart as co-chair of an emergency management work group to improve emergency management practices in both countries," said Fugate. "These partnerships are critical in ensuring that we are incorporating best practices and also working towards greater public preparedness."

The IDF/HFC partners with the Israeli National Emergency Management Authority (NEMA) on emergency management issues. IDF/HFC and NEMA work with FEMA under an emergency management work stream workgroup established under a 2007 Memorandum of Understanding with DHS.

FEMA and Israel have had several exchanges of information over the past year. FEMA representatives attended the national preparedness exercise Turning Point 3 in Israel on June 1, 2009. In the past, Israel sent observers to the TOPOFF 4 national exercise in the United States, as well as personnel to participate in FEMA emergency management training.

FEMA’s mission is to support our citizens and first responders to ensure that as a nation we work together to build, sustain, and improve our capability to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate all hazards.

FEMA: FEMA Administrator Fugate Meets Top Israeli Official To Discuss Emergency Management Issues

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

John Brignell
Number Watch
Thu, 01 Jan 2009 20:37 UTC

© Unknown

It is to some extent forgivable when people adopt extreme positions out of misapprehension or delusion. It is quite another matter if they mislead others by deliberate falsehood. Politicians, of course, treat the lie as part of their professional equipment. Indeed, in some circumstances they are obliged to use it (when, for example, telling the truth about the economy would cause a run on the currency). In science, up to recent times, there is no circumstance in which a deliberate falsehood is justifiable. It requires at a minimum being drummed out of one’s learned society.
All that has changed with the rise of authoritarian government. In Britain this took the form of nationalisation of the universities, begun under Thatcher and completed under Blair. In the USA it took the form of new state-funded bureaucracies, such as the EPA, who maintained control by the monopoly of funding. The global warming religion changed everything.
There is a contrast in the behaviour of people who speak from conviction and those who speak from convenience. This enables us to uncover those who are lying deliberately and distinguish them from the merely deluded. As M. Maigret once remarked “It is always the clever ones who leave a clue.”
Patronage
There is a long and respectable history of patronage in science as well as art, literature, lexicography etc. The patrons (other than the church) used their own money. The modern patrons, however, are bureaucrats who use the money of others; to whit, taxpayers. Their science is not the science of recent tradition, but a whole new ball game.
There are major differences between real science and bureaucratic science (BS). Real science involves living with the prospect of failure. In BS, failure is not allowed. The whole project is mapped out beforehand in forms such as Gantt charts. There are deliverables that have to be delivered on the due date. With the exception of really big physics, real science is carried out by small groups. It is the same with BS, except that there are about five managers for every researcher. Above all the expected result must be delivered on time. Those who desire further patronage never report a negative result or, indeed, a result at variance with the expectations of the sponsors.
We can identify the “scientists” who habitually lie by the fact that they produce, on time, results that are never unexpected and always conform to the establishment-sponsored theory. Real science is never that predictable.
Powerful patronage makes people over-confident. They come to believe that they are untouchable. Like the royal favourites of mediaeval times, they soar in the air on a zephyr of preferment, only to get too close to the sun and plunge to earth.
Which brings us to:
Secrecy
In the security of powerful patronage some of the new brigade began to think that they were above not only the procedures of science, but of all other academic disciplines as well. In the case of the notorious Hockey Stick, for example, they claimed that knowledge from history, art, literature, archaeology etc. was all wrong and that their computer manipulation of such tenuous data as tree rings established that the Little Ice Age and the Mediaeval Warm Period never happened. The most powerful patrons of all, the UN, seized on the results and made them the main feature of one of their apocalyptic IPCC reports on the coming climate disaster. One of the first tests of any scientific work is to pose the question “Can the results be reproduced?” The Hockey team and the other computer nerds behind the doom-laden predictions were outraged at the suggestion that they should make public their computations and results, which had in fact been obtained with generous public funding. This stance was supported by the political establishment and, though it might work in a secretive society like the UK , this did not go down well in the more open USA . Anyway, to cut a long story short, thanks largely to the untiring persistence of two Canadians, the Hockey Stick was broken. The critics were subjected to a torrent of vilification and derision, but eventually after a review by the highest statistical authority in the USA , they were vindicated. The UN simply dropped the Hockey Stick as though it had never happened and carried on with other forms of propaganda.
British “researchers” into global warming refused to yield up their calculations to scrutiny on the grounds that “You only want to criticise it.” Contrast this with a real scientist, Albert Einstein, who passed all his calculations onto Eddington, so that they latter could devise a critical test, that might have damned the theory, but in the end spectacularly did not.
What have they got to hide?
Which brings us to:
Rewriting the past
Critics of the apocalyptic global warming theory began to be disturbed at what was happening to experimental data under the cloak of secrecy surrounding the claims. One signal was assertion that the US results were based on a high quality sensor network. When that claim was made twice in one paragraph, it began to sound more like the patter of a second-hand car salesman than a statement by scientists. As a result, a small band of unpaid volunteers began a systematic review of the weather stations on which the claims were based. What they found was even more appalling than anyone had anticipated. Ramshackle is barely adequate to describe the system they found. The siting of many of the sensors broke all the rules. Many were on black tarmac and others were even adjacent to the outlets of air conditioning units. The High Quality Network was, to say the least, a mirage. But it was worse than this. Astute observers began to notice that the historical records of temperatures were changing and almost always in such a way as to increase the illusion of global warming. NASA, of all institutions, was involved in this dubious practice and it was all done without explanation.
All of this was widely reported on the internet, but the general public had no idea that it had happened.
Which brings us to:
Ratchet reporting
In the past the more respectable end of the media has been fairly assiduous in presenting both sides of arguments, but that has now come to an end. Since the spread of the global warming religion this has all changed. All occurrences of unseasonably hot weather, for example, were extensively reported, while cold weather was played down. They have now got over this dilemma by changing the vocabulary. Pronouncements by warming activists within the scientific community are given full coverage, while those from the large and growing sceptical sector are totally ignored. Most ordinary readers who do not inhabit the internet have no idea that such views exist: yet, when talking to ordinary people in pubs, it is gratifying how much spontaneous scepticism exists.
Why would anyone sure of their position be unwilling to let any alternative be heard? What have they got to hide?
Which brings us to:
Censorship
Ratchet reporting is a passive way of misleading the public by telling the truth but not the whole truth. The active form is direct censorship, which is now rife among once respectable scientific journals, as well as powerful media institutions such as the BBC. The self-styled environmental editors are the biggest threat to science since the arraignment of Galileo. The editors of Nature, once the prime journal of science, jumped through hoops to prevent the publication of a short article that challenged the orthodoxy, offering one lame excuse after another. Right across the spectrum of scientific publication it is the rule rather than the exception that any challenge to global warming will be automatically declined. A study of the situation by leading American statisticians (the Wegman report) included the observation that cliques of believers had formed peer review circles designed to prevent alternative views being published.
A sceptical climate web site was restricted from view at the Johnson Space Centre on the grounds of being adult or sexually explicit. Absurd, but for lover of human freedom rather frightening.
What have they got to hide?
Intermission – a short quiz

You have made some observations and calculations, which show that humanity is doomed unless it changes its ways. You have total belief in the accuracy of your predictions. Do you:

(a) Announce your results, but keep your workings secret for fear that someone will criticise them.
(b) Announce your results, but set up a group of companies to make yourself mega-rich on the back of the scare you have created.
(c) Drop everything, including secrecy and profit, and devote yourself to saving the human race.

Consensus
This is a word redolent of the state of contemporary science. It is a political word, not a scientific one. Most of the great innovations in science have been by individuals, or very small groups, striking out from the prevailing opinion to establish new frontiers. As Einstein is reputed to have remarked, when the Nazis published a book in which one hundred German scientists pronounced him wrong, “It only needed one of them to be right.” There was indeed a “consensus” in physics at the start of the twentieth century that “the science is settled”, but that was blown apart by Einstein and his contemporaries. Most of the great breakthroughs in science are made by those who are in a minority of one. The moral pressure to join the consensus and support the establishment view is substantial, even carrying the threat of dismissal. Such things have no place in a free society. This is not persuasion, it is enforcement. Research funding is exclusively given to proponents of establishment theories and denied to opponents. It is a remarkable tribute to the human spirit that so many dare stand up to the bullies and accept the contemptuous label of “denialist” (not that the general public ever get to hear of them). Others, who have family responsibilities, have to preserve their reservations for private conversation.
As for the accompanying slogan “The science is settled”, if it is settled it is not science and if it is science it is not settled.
Greed
People are driven by various hungers in various proportions – power, sex, approbation etc. Money is a proxy and an enabler for these things. Hunger beyond a normal requirement is greed. Greed has often led to the downfall of notable personages, politicians, TV evangelists etc. who are caught with their fingers in the till.
One thing that divides the followers of charismatic leaders, such as TV evangelists, from the critics is attitudes to the life styles of those leaders. Some of them are brought down by their excesses driven by greed. Others seem to get away with it.
Al Gore could hardly be called charismatic, but the sheer magnitude of his conspicuous consumption and his followers’ tolerance of it are truly shocking to independent observers. A private jet, palatial home, fleets of cars etc. seem so at variance with the message of austerity he sends out to hoi polloi. He goes on progress like some mediaeval archbishop, flaunting his wealth yet demanding frugality from everyone else. Never in modern times has the political slogan “Do as I say, not as I do” been so epitomised in one man. Yet, astonishingly, the world establishment showers him with honours and money; even, fantastically, a Nobel Prize. He excuses himself with the explanation that all his excesses are offset by payments to one of his own companies.
The iconic visual lie is Gore standing in front of a photograph of hurricane Katrina. Even many of the most vehement supporters of global warming would draw a line at connecting that tragic event with global warming.
If you are convinced you are right, you stand up and defy the world, irrespective of any personal rewards.
Shifting sands
Here is a progression – global warming, climate change, climate disruption. They are three terms that have been successively used to describe the same putative phenomenon. Real science does not keep changing its nomenclature, save in special cases, such as taxonomy where interpretations alter. The progression to “climate change” occurred when it became obvious that the world was not warming as advertised, so claim could be laid to cold weather as well as warm; but that was not emotive enough; so “climate disruption” came into being. It simply means bad weather. The weather has long been a topic of exploitation by demagogues. A hundred years ago, it was due to the wrath of god. Fifty years ago, it was due to “all them atom bombs”. Now it is due to the humble carbon atom. Unseasonal weather is occurring somewhere around the globe all the time. According to the principle of selectivity, a thousand occurrences of “normal” weather are ignored and the abnormal case is broadcast around the world.
Avoidance of debate
A crucial component of real science is debate. At the 1927 Fifth Solvay International Conference, the world’s most notable physicists met to discuss the new quantum theory. Einstein found himself defending classical physics against his good friend Niels Bohr. Einstein, dissenting from new concepts such as Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, remarked “God does not play dice.” Bohr replied, “Einstein, stop telling God what to do.” Ultimately seventeen of the twenty-nine participants were Nobel Prize winners.
That is the way that science solves its great controversies. A conference is held, at which the opposing factions question each other’s position and in the end a solution is reached. Propagandists, however, do not like debate. In 2005 in the UK two conferences occurred. One was a modest affair organised by scientists for scientists. Most participants were there under their own financial steam. The speakers were distinguished real scientists (as opposed to “climate” scientists), who presented evidence – numbers, charts and photographs. The other was a lavish three-day politically-inspired festival subsidised by the Government, with an elaborate banquet and not a dissenting voice. Such evidence as was presented was highly selective, though most of the claims arose from computer models. Guess which one received coverage by the environmental editors.
Then there is pseudo-debate, in which the BBC specialises. A believer is put up against a non-believer, then scrupulous editing ensures that one looks like the fount of wisdom and the other looks foolish.
Al Gore never debates.
Hidden agenda
It is notable that support for the global warming theory comes almost exclusively from the New Left, a form of authoritarian socialism that grants itself the ironic title of “Liberal”. Classical liberals, who believe above all in human freedom, are left without a home or a title. They are lumped together with conservative politicians and described as “Right Wing”. The success of the New Left (also known as The Greens) is one of the most remarkable phenomena in history. They have taken over most of the western world; the political parties (such as the UK Conservative Party), the media, the scientific institutions and many other components of society.
Claims by the opposition that the global warming is a political manoeuvre by the New Left are, naturally, met by the accusation that they are all of the Old Right.
James Hansen, notorious among global warming critics as a ruthless fudger of data, blew the gaff in the euphoria of the Green takeover in the USA , by admitting that the main issue was the redistribution of wealth.
All of the above is how we know that they know they are lying.

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/188014-Global-Warming-Pathology-How-we-know-they-know-they-are-lying

Bookmark It

Hide Sites