Delingpole’s new landing pad, the inside scoop

Last week a number of people were in shock about the news that James Delingpole had his last column at the Telegraph. It was all rather abrupt. As to why, I have the inside scoop.

I asked James directly, and in a nutshell it was three things.

1. They paid him poorly, ’nuff said.

2. They never seemed to appreciate the kind of traffic and exposure he’d brought. Remember, Delingpole was the first MSM columnist to break Climategate, and I’m pleased to say he got the scoop from WUWT. But, they didn’t really recognize the asset, even though he won an award for his Climategate coverage. When Delingpole’s column won the Bloggie award for “Best Weblog About Politics“, they didn’t even mention it in the print edition or in the online main page. Usually when a columnist or writer wins such an award, the paper crows about it.

3. Often, they didn’t like the content. As we know, James skewers the left and in particular greens. He reports he was getting increasing pressure over his environmental essays.

Usually when people are the most angry at someone for something they’ve said or written, it’s because what they’ve said or written has some truth in it. While Delingpole pulled no punches when it came to describing (with great flourish) the defective nature of some aspects of the environmental movement, some ‘proper’ folks found it hard to stomach.

Of course, then we have this, which I find even harder to stomach:

micats-vigil-web

Andrew Montford cited this as an example of Delingpole’s prescience.

So, now, the Telegraph’s loss is Breitbart’s gain, and just three days later, James has come out swinging:

Delingpole_Breitbart

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/02/16/Lefty-Lies-UK-Floods

All in all, quite an exit mirrored by a grand entrance.

Finally, all this leads me to something I’ve been remiss at doing simply because the day to day business of running WUWT often gets in the way, and that’s to recommend James most recent book. He kindly sent me a copy, and while the title admittedly made me cringe, once I started reading it, I found it lighthearted and hilarious. It reads a bit like a dictionary, except every definition has a punch line. Highly recommended, click the cover to have a look.

Delingpole-eco-book

Also, be sure to add Breitbart London to your bookmarks. Delingpole’s latest is: Whose Life Is More Important? Yours, Or A Shark’s?

Oh, and what essay on Delingpole by yours truly would be complete without this photo courtesy of our friends at “Skeptical Science”?

WeAreSkeptics

About these ads
This entry was posted in media, Opinion. Bookmark the permalink.

256 Responses to Delingpole’s new landing pad, the inside scoop

  1. Jenn Oates says:

    Telegraph’s loss is Breitbart’s gain.

  2. Nice props Tony. JD has well and truly landed at Breitbart with his merry Knights of Delingpole following along and the Telegraph is far poorer for it!

  3. William McClenney says:

    You go Delingpole! I too have been the victim of corporate myopia in this regard.,,,,,

  4. Paul Pierett says:

    Anthony,

    You need to check out Greenfry.com

    They are nice enough to supply hit lists of climate skeptics and deniers. I think I found a spot where you are honorably identified. I unsubscribe a week ago. They hate my guts too. When the blog lost their oversee.for a while, I got quite a bit of open forum on Sunspots. Since then all that was deleted. Now, it is SOP man-made global warming absurd to the 10th power.

    Paul

    REPLY: Doesn’t appear to be anything but a domain parking at that Greenfry.com URL? – Anthony

  5. Like the Telegraph also like James Delingpole, the day Christopher Booker goes is the day I cancel my subscription!

  6. Gail Combs says:

    I love Delingpole’s rapier wit and delight in sending some of the choicer bits to my two journalist Brothers-in-law.

    The world needs a lot more journalists of his caliber.

  7. daveburton says:

    Wow, Anthony, you guys are really ripped!

  8. Truthseeker says:

    MSM in all countries pay their journalists poorly. That is why they are leaving to the new media, sometimes for other organisations (like James) or for themselves like Mike Smith and Donna Laframboise. It is also why the MSM produce such crap coverage of anything remotely like science. Only activists zealots would work for that type of money. If you pay peanuts and you get monkeys (apologies to all monkeys for the possible inference that the left wing journalists are monkeys).

  9. Hannah Jay says:

    The Telegraph is Dead to Me.

    Not a Pause…an End.

    (And they still print the sadly senile Geoffrey Lean.)

  10. NZPete54 says:

    I have always enjoyed reading JD. It’s rather sad that myopia at the Telegraph has led to this, as I thought that paper was one of the few balanced publications left in Britain.
    Welcome to Breitbart, and prosper! Here in NZ, I’ll keep following your posts.

  11. Rhys Jaggar says:

    The ‘Right Wing Club for the Good Ol’ Boys’ continues its online love in……..

    Delingpole was late to the Climate Change Party and thinks that it started with ‘Climategate’.

    Well: it didn’t. It started a decade earlier.

    This isn’t about heroism, it’s about political credit.

    Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war. Late to the party but demanding all the credit.

  12. asybot says:

    Many years ago, as my parents told us post WWII, The British media (as were their soldiers and air men) were the back bone of post WWII Europe. I am not sure what they call bone degeneration these days in Britain , but I am glad to see there are a few chips of the old block left! Welcome JD! (and I mean no matter were you publish btw)

  13. AlecM says:

    97% of MSM journalists conform because that’s the way hey think they’ll rise to the top.

    3% tell the truth.

    I wonder where I read those statistics before?

  14. James Delingpole is a valuable climate truth warrior. I remember back in the Climategate days, I was always spreading his articles far and wide everywhere on internet blogs including WUWT. I’ve heard him a number of times interviewed on Alex Jones Infowars radio. JD is very well known and appreciated in many media circles. Breitbart got a great catch. Moves like this make MSM more irrelevant by the minute. Alternative internet media news is kicking lamestream media’s butt. MSNBC and CNN barely get 500k viewers an evening, 15 years ago that number was closer to 15 million viewers an evening. Mainstream media will die a miserable death because virtually no one goes to their channels anymore. MSM doesn’t give people the type of news they want to hear. You’d think they would wise up, if for nothing else, a better paycheck.

  15. Ken Hall says:

    I used to happily pay for a subscription to the Telegraph. Now I am glad that simply going into my firefox options and deleting the Telegraph cookies means I can read it for what it is worth. Free.

  16. Richard111 says:

    We stopped buying the Daily Telegraph over three years ago. Been buying the Daily Mail but beginning to have doubts about them. Wondering about the Spectator.

  17. Fortunately I’d finished breakfast before seeing that Skeptical Science mashup again. But you’ve got under their skins. Respect and thanks, Anthony and James

  18. Thorne says:

    Would it be possible to change the sidebar link to his Breitbart blog?

  19. Bert Walker says:

    Perhaps Rhys Jaggar should do more research on J. Delingpole before posting.
    (If only not to appear ignorant.)

  20. pat says:

    good luck james. my politics is not always in alignment with yours, but who’s complaining about that. you always make me laugh. we all need to stick together to beat the CAGW dragon. besides, aren’t we always being told diversity is good! lol.

    besides, the Tele is no longer the conservative paper it once was. now, if you wrote a humourless article, such as the one below, for Huffington Post, with no sense of the ridiculous, and with a headline & text that actually accepts CAGW, you could be writing for the Murdoch Press!

    19 Feb: News Ltd. Australia: Some futurists aren’t worried about global warming or overpopulation
    IT’S almost impossible to view the news anymore without seeing something negative related to global warming, overpopulation or environmental degradation of the planet. The facts speak for themselves. Pollution is rampant in many cities. Entire forests are being cut down. And the human species is adding over 200,000 new people a day to the world. Environmental scientists have warned for years that the human race is dramatically affecting the planet and its ecosystems. Humans are changing the climate of Earth, consuming all its finite resources, and causing the disappearance of over 10,000 species a year.
    Despite this, a growing number of futurists, many who are transhumanists — people who aim to move beyond the human being using science and technology — aren’t worried. While New York City, Boston and Miami may be partially underwater by 2100, many futurists don’t plan to be around in the flesh by then. And if they are, they’ll have the technology to walk on water…
    Within a few years, humans will begin attempting to download their first thoughts into computers. Soon after, a software interface will bring to life our authentic virtual personalities. Eventually, especially with the help of artificial intelligence, we will complete a full upload of our brains, and our minds and its thoughts will freely move in and out of machines. We will be digital avatars of our biological selves…
    Will this new phase of human existence require as many resources from the planet as we are currently using? Will we continue to eat food? Breathe air? Depend on water? Procreate? The answer is probably not…
    There are probably zero futurists who feel good about damaging our beautiful planet. However, many of them realise that the benefit of the species’ rapid evolutionary ascent outweighs the harm progress is causing to Earth. Our planet is strong; it can handle climate change and an expanding human population while our species prepares for the transhumanist age. The evolutionary outcome of humanity will be better for turning a blind eye on Mother Earth. Exponential technological growth, increased prosperity from globalisation, and maintaining world peace are the critical issues of the future, not global warming, overpopulation or environmental degradation.
    This article originally appeared on The Huffington Post.
    http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/some-futurists-arent-worried-about-global-warming-or-overpopulation/story-fnjwvztl-1226831221065

  21. Jack Savage says:

    I wish James Delingpole every success. He may have come a little late to his position on man-made global warming…but then so did I after many years of believing what the BBC and my newspapers were telling me. He may be the Court Jester of Skepticism but as a consequence has attracted much more attention than other more staid figures. Absolutely overall a force for good. And pretty fearless, which is rare.
    It is a bit unfortunate for us single issue campaigners on “climate change” that he is such a red-blooded libertarian, but you cannot have everything!

  22. ntesdorf says:

    Where Delingpole goes, there I will follow him. No more Telegraph for me.

  23. Lew Skannen says:

    I don’t know why the Tele do this. I used to buy it every Tuesday when I lived in London because Mark Steyn had a column. Then they got rid of him.
    Now Delingpole. As mentioned above if Booker goes that is the end.
    I have to say though, that I do very much enjoy Geoffrey Leans column…. just not for the reasons he would like.

  24. pat says:

    btw the writer of the News Ltd/Huffpo piece is:

    Wikipedia: Zoltan Istvan
    He is best known for his controversial novel, The Transhumanist Wager, a #1 bestseller in both Philosophy and Science Fiction Visionary and Metaphysical on Amazon…
    He’s explored over 100 countries—many as a journalist for the National Geographic Channel—writing, filming, and appearing in dozens of television stories, articles, and webcasts. His work has also been featured by The New York Times Syndicate, Outside, San Francisco Chronicle, The Daily Caller, Sail, BBC Radio, NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, Animal Planet, and the Travel Channel…
    Istvan blogs for Psychology Today (The Transhumanist Philosopher) and The Huffington Post…
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoltan_Istvan

    James, you see how the media would flock to you if you wrote like Zoltan!

  25. Streetcred says:

    Dellers’ book title is a very English trait … you need to understand a bit of English humor first in order to appreciate the title.

  26. George Lawson says:

    Rhys Jaggar says:
    February 18, 2014 at 11:17 pm
    “The ‘Right Wing Club for the Good Ol’ Boys’ continues its online love in……..
    Delingpole was late to the Climate Change Party and thinks that it started with ‘Climategate’.
    Well: it didn’t. It started a decade earlier.”

    I don’t mind how late anyone comes to the party as long as they come. The fact is that millions of people are coming late to the party after recognising the AGW fraud. Let them keep coming. I’m sure even you Mr Jagger will want to come to the party one day when the utter stupidity of the AGW cause, which you obviously support at the moment, sinks in.

  27. Streetcred says:

    February 18, 2014 at 11:17 pm | Rhys Jaggar says:

    Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war. Late to the party but demanding all the credit.

    Oh, my ! your petticoat is showing … Dellers is not an American !

  28. meltemian says:

    Wow!! What a picture….I’ll be fantasising all morning!
    Wait a minute….I KNOW James hasn’t got pecs like that, I’ve seen him in his shorts! Come to think of it I believe An..ony has lost a bit of ‘presence’ somewhere too? Can’t be sure about about ‘his lordship’ but all three of you look pretty good, I may put the pic on my fridge door to keep ‘himself’ on the diet.

  29. Lew Skannen says:

    Off topic but I wonder whether twits like Rhys Jaggar ever try to tell the Chinese about people arriving ‘late’ to WW2.

  30. Mr Green Genes says:

    “Finally, all this leads me to something I’ve been remiss at doing simply because the day to day business of running WUWT often gets in the way, and that’s to recommend Jame’s most recent book.”

    Anthony, someone may wish to do a bit of editing here.

  31. mike fowle says:

    I read the Telegraph for years (following my father’s example), and it used to have a delightful dry sense of humour but it has been going downhill for years (possibly when the Barclay Brothers got it). Any paper with Mary Riddell writing in it can’t be taken seriously. I stopped reading it years ago and James’ departure just reinforces my views.

  32. snow says:

    sorry about being off topic but I need your help quickly, Ive sterd up a hornets nest on youtube with some greenie hippy. please answer this question quickly if you can,and promise I want bother you with off topic stuff again. Do our tax dollars help pay for these agw scientist research grants.

  33. DirkH says:

    Rhys Jaggar says:
    February 18, 2014 at 11:17 pm
    “Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war. Late to the party but demanding all the credit.”

    You should be very careful with the word “demanding”.

    Delingpole demands nothing of anyone; rather the international Green movement with their leader science czar John Holdren of EcoScience fame in the White House demands population reduction, tax increases, de-industrialisation and the expropriation of private property via Agenda 21; furthermore the worldwide ban of nuclear technology and GM technology (as demanded by Greenpeace).

  34. Ian H says:

    Unfortunately Breitbart isn’t a real news agency, just a right wing propaganda website. Maybe he can write stories about the Friends of Hamas.

  35. William Astley says:

    Congratulations on finding a better venue for knowledgeable and open journalism. It is astonishing how much money has been wasted on green scams. The UK floods are a very clear example of the consequences of idiotic, impractical, green environmental policy.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/02/16/Lefty-Lies-UK-Floods

    Comment:
    It is interesting to compare James Delingpole’s thoughtful insightful article on the UK floods to the Economist’s vague, confusing, punch pulling, David Cameroon protecting, article on the same subject.

  36. Susie says:

    You’ll need to update your list of blogs on the right of this page with his new URL

  37. RichardLH says:

    Richard111 says:
    February 18, 2014 at 11:46 pm

    “We stopped buying the Daily Telegraph over three years ago. Been buying the Daily Mail but beginning to have doubts about them. Wondering about the Spectator.”

    Read them all (and many more) on-line and stop having to worry about purchasing any one of them. Makes for a nice broad view of the world to boot.

  38. Jimbo says:

    I have about 4 bookmarks for for global warming. One of them was James Deligpole’s Telegraph Blog. I have updated my bookmark.

  39. Alan the Brit says:

    Rhys Jagger:
    Well, yes, our friends in the Virginian Colonies were a little late at arriving in WW2 in some respects, however they were giving Britain a lot of support in many other ways. When they did eventually arrive, as the result of a most unruly prod from behind, they were also a little slow at first, but a giant takes time to get moving, slowly at first, then a little quicker, with every step, until they were eventually in full spate. The 300,000+ graves in France alone might just enlighten you as to the tremendous cost in Human sacrifice they gave to liberating Europe from tyranny, just so you could say what you want to say, & in English instead of German (No offence to Germans anywhere, I speak a little myself)!!! Oh & that was for the SECOND time in the 20th Century!!!!

  40. AlexS says:

    “Unfortunately Breitbart isn’t a real news agency”

    I suppose for you real news agency means forcing people at point of the gun buying BBC leftist propaganda…

  41. daddylonglegs says:

    The flooding fiasco this winter is making many British people wake up to the reality of the ugly misanthropy of the eco-fascist Khmer Vert movement. It is indeed well over time that free societies “get rid of all the green crap”. Karl Popper’s contribution to WW2 was to write the book “The Open Society and its Enemies”. Its message remains vital today, the eco-fascists are the biggest threat to democracies.

    Some quotes from Popper, The Open Society and its Enemies:

    If we are uncritical we shall always find what we want: we shall look for, and find, confirmations, and we shall look away from, and not see, whatever might be dangerous to our pet theories. In this way it is only too easy to obtain what appears to be overwhelming evidence in favor of a theory which, if approached critically, would have been refuted.

    Whenever a theory appears to you as the only possible one, take this as a sign that you have neither understood the theory nor the problem which it was intended to solve.

    There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions. … It obviously endangers the freedom and the objectivity of our discussion if we attack a person instead of attacking an opinion or, more precisely, a theory.

    Science may be described as the art of systematic over-simplification — the art of discerning what we may with advantage omit.

    Other quotes:

    “The collectivists . . have the zest for progress, the sympathy for the poor, the burning sense of
    wrong, the impulse for great deeds, which have been lacking in latter-day liberalism. But their
    science is founded on a profound misunderstanding, and their actions, therefore, are deeply
    destructive and reactionary. So men’s hearts are torn, their minds divided, they are offered
    impossible choices.

    Walter Lippmann.

    “To the debacle of liberal science can be traced the moral schism of the modern world which so tragically divides enlightened men”
    Walter Lippmann.

    “The chief danger to our philosophy, apart from laziness and woolliness, is scholasticism, … which is treating what is vague as if it was precise. . .”
    F. P. Ramsey.”

  42. dbstealey says:

    snow says:

    “Do our tax dollars help pay for these agw scientist research grants.”

    Yes. More than $100 billion since 2001. You will have to look it up, though, as I am going by memory.

  43. snow says:

    Thank you dbstealey.

  44. Sherry Moore says:

    So happy he jumped over to Breitbart. It’s a way better place for him in the long run and he will reach more people anyway. I hope his readership follows him as he enjoys the benefits of a much wider audience from Breitbart.

  45. tokyoboy says:

    I’ve just ordered The Little Green Book from Amazon.

  46. Bart says:

    Rhys Jaggar says:
    February 18, 2014 at 11:17 pm

    “Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war.”

    Mmmmm… Unh-uh.

    Alan the Brit says:
    February 19, 2014 at 2:12 am

    Well, yes, we do feel we played a key role. But, many of us are well aware that Britain was sine qua non. Had the Brits not held virtually alone in the darkest days, there would have been no safe routes for American troops and material to arrive.

    I’ve had arguments with friends who insist that, by virtue of suffering the most, the Soviet Union really won the war. I say, you don’t give credit to the guys who helped start the fire. In my book, the Brits were the real heroes.

  47. Jack C says:

    I am hoping James will skewer the Greens over this piece of Stalinism:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26187711

    Quote:

    ‘Greens call for clear-out of ‘climate change deniers’ reads the headlines, it’s actaully quite concerning.

  48. klem says:

    I followed him at the Telegraph, I will now follow him at Breitbarts.

    I missed him, I was experiencing ‘Dellingpole withdrawal’ for a few days there.

  49. charles nelson says:

    The Soviet Union won WW2 by kicking it’s way into Berlin after the greatest land battle in history…

  50. M Courtney says:

    Interestingly the Telegraph Comment section still lists James Delingpole as one of their columnists in the banner.

  51. ozspeaksup says:

    sent the book link and the wuwt link to everyone.
    glad I can follow him to Breitbart ,thanks, and off to read the latest.

  52. James (Aus.) says:

    The Telegraph has left my desktop and a couple of days ago I installed Breitbart. Not a smart move, Telegraph, to say the least. If the management of The Telegraph are as thick as that, or are conflicted with the execrable wind farm racket, then haste them to the dump.

  53. A C Osborn says:

    charles nelson says:
    February 19, 2014 at 3:12 am

    The Soviet Union won WW2 by kicking it’s way into Berlin after the greatest land battle in history…

    Ho right so if Britain and the Commonwealth plus the USA had not been fighting in Europe, Africa, the Pacific and Middle East the Russians would have won the War. Are you trying to re-write history for us all by any chance?

  54. A C Osborn says:

    snow says:
    February 19, 2014 at 1:40 am

    sorry about being off topic but I need your help quickly, Ive sterd up a hornets nest on youtube with some greenie hippy. please answer this question quickly if you can,and promise I want bother you with off topic stuff again. Do our tax dollars help pay for these agw scientist research grants.

    I think you might find some great articles on where the money goes over at Jo Nova’s forum
    http://joannenova.com.au/reference-pages/

  55. Bloke down the pub says:
  56. alleagra says:

    Richard111 – Spectator! Just taken on a year’s online subscription (the free bottle of premier cru [no less] champagne in the post was, I admit, a slight encouragement) and reckon it’s excellent value though the free offering is pretty fair too. No, I have no connection with it of any kind but do feel like giving it a thumbs up as my first ever online subscription . Editor Fraser Nelson strikes me as a genuinely independent spirit as indicated by the range of opinion expressed in the magazine. Founded in 1828, it’s (I think) the oldest magazine still in print. Booker, Delingpole and others do contribute on occasion though it is of course a general interest publication.

  57. Questing Vole says:

    Credit where credit is due, yesterday’s Torygraph business pages included a recommendable piece on the wisdom of investing in adaptation to climate change, rather than in attempted prevention. I’d give the author and reference but my paper copy has already gone for recycling.

    Made excellent sense to me, especially when no-one can reliably estimate the relative share of natural and anthropogenic influences on today’s climate, let alone on what the situation may be 20, 50, 100 years down the line, and when the price of prevention may be economic suicide.

    As for the idea that Gaia can’t cope with homeopathic-scale changes in atmospheric carbon levels, which planet do these Eco-Maoists think they are living on?

  58. RaiderDingo says:

    His writing style is hilarious, he points out the illogical behavior of these groups

  59. John Mann says:

    OK – I’ve just looked at Delingpole’s Little Green Book on Amazon.

    I just read the section on Acid Rain, which was very interesting.

    I then read the Wikipedia article on Acid Rain.

    Delingpole states that “‘acid rain’ was little more than urban myth”, and implies that subsequent research has discredited the notion.

    No one would ever get that idea from reading Wikipedia. There is not even a hint of it.

    I’m sceptical about climate change. I’m even somewhat sceptical about Wikipedia. But if Delingpole is correct, then we have a Wikipedia article on a scientific subject which is completely and utterly misleading.

    Should I, as a natural sceptic, also be sceptical about Delingpole?

  60. RichardLH says:

    A C Osborn says:
    February 19, 2014 at 3:30 am

    “charles nelson says:
    February 19, 2014 at 3:12 am

    The Soviet Union won WW2 by kicking it’s way into Berlin after the greatest land battle in history…

    Ho right so if Britain and the Commonwealth plus the USA had not been fighting in Europe, Africa, the Pacific and Middle East the Russians would have won the War. Are you trying to re-write history for us all by any chance?”

    Actually a couple of blokes (with a small team of helpers) managed to tell the Soviets all about German battle intentions and thus allowed them to win the most important Soviet/German tank battle that then halted the German advance and so started the Soviet push to Berlin.

    Lookup Tutte and Flowers online and possibly discover what you do not know.

    Even the little things matter.

  61. David L. says:

    February 18, 2014 at 11:17 pm | Rhys Jaggar says:

    Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war. Late to the party but demanding all the credit.
    ——————-
    America tries to not enter a war, gets dragged in, helps win it, and gets criticized for demaning all the credit? If American starts the war or joins too early they are criticized for being war mongers. Exactly what’s the right answer Rhys Jaggar?

  62. Gamecock says:

    The Allied victory in WWII was a team effort. Here is an important statistic: 7/8 of German division months were in the east. The battle in the east dwarfed the battle in the west. But many Americans have no knowledge at all of the war in the east, and think we won WWII. So Rhys Jaggar’s comment about “a typical American” is a fair comment.

  63. rogerknights says:

    Susie says:
    February 19, 2014 at 2:00 am

    You’ll need to update your list of blogs on the right of this page with his new URL

    But that won’t tell us when he (or any blogger so listed) has just posted a great article like this one.

    Anthony: Please add a tab to the top of the page titled, Links of the Week or Latest Links. It would have an introduction asking WUWTers to post and briefly describe links to their favorite “finds” of recent (within the past 30 days) material of interest, preferentially from other blogs. WUWTers’ posts older than 7 days would be automatically clipped. (Or a moderator could do the clipping manually each morning.)

    This would make WUWT a central hub for the latest and greatest material from our side. It would encourage peripheral bloggers to keep up the good fight. It would be a great filter and amplifier of our side’s voice.

  64. clovis marcus says:

    James did tweet that he’d toned down his first brietbart article. Can’t wait for when he properly let’s rip. ;)

  65. rogerknights says:

    Anthony: PS: My suggestion for a Latest Links tab might not “work out” as I envisage. But that shouldn’t be a decisive objection. If it is a net negative, it can be dropped (or modified). Let’s give it a chance.

  66. rogerknights says:

    Anthony: PPS: The introduction to “Latest Links” would discourage the posting of links to “news” items or to quotations of warmist absurdities. Those should remain in the Tips and Notes thread.

    REPLY: Roger thanks for adding to my massive workload. No. – Anthony

  67. Sun Spot says:

    Another benefit of a little Global Warming is obviously great ab’s, so that would be aGW.

  68. Ron C. says:

    snow, osborn, and dbstealey

    Yes, over 100 billion US tax $ spent to “fight climate change” since 2001.

    But it is working: no additional warming in the years since, and US fossil fuel emissions are way down.

    Memo to John Kerry: Just “stay the course”. Or how about a “mission accomplished” banner?

    sarc/off

  69. Frederick Davies says:

    This is sad. Wars are not won by retreats, and James retreating from The Daily Telegraph to a new and unknown Breitbart London is not helping. After all The Telegraph is a major newspaper in the UK, and James was probably the last writer there (and probably all major newspapers in the UK) who really went after the Watermelons. Now the field is left to Geoffrey Lean and Co without anyone telling the other side.

    FD

  70. rogerknights says:

    Sherry Moore says:
    February 19, 2014 at 2:49 am

    So happy he jumped over to Breitbart. It’s a way better place for him in the long run and he will reach more people anyway. I hope his readership follows him as he enjoys the benefits of a much wider audience from Breitbart.

    I’m hoping but not hopeful. Because of my worry, I think he’ll need a publicity “assist” from having his best columns promoted in a Latest Links thread here, such as I just proposed to Anthony.

  71. rogerknights says:

    Do our tax dollars help pay for these agw scientist research grants.

    IIRC, most funding for grants comes from the National Science Foundation, which is federally funded, or from other federal agencies. Some grant money comes from foundations.

  72. David L. Hagen says:

    Hail to the Few who are flattening the “mighty”!

  73. John Tillman says:

    Rhys Jaggar says:
    February 18, 2014 at 11:17 pm
    The ‘Right Wing Club for the Good Ol’ Boys’ continues its online love in……..

    Delingpole was late to the Climate Change Party and thinks that it started with ‘Climategate’.

    Well: it didn’t. It started a decade earlier.

    This isn’t about heroism, it’s about political credit.

    Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war. Late to the party but demanding all the credit.

    charles nelson says:
    February 19, 2014 at 3:12 am

    The Soviet Union won WW2 by kicking it’s way into Berlin after the greatest land battle in history…

    Gamecock says:
    February 19, 2014 at 5:00 am
    The Allied victory in WWII was a team effort. Here is an important statistic: 7/8 of German division months were in the east. The battle in the east dwarfed the battle in the west. But many Americans have no knowledge at all of the war in the east, and think we won WWII. So Rhys Jaggar’s comment about “a typical American” is a fair comment.

    ——————————————————————–

    Rhys Jaggar’s comment isn’t fair. It’s ignorant. Delingpole is not an American.

    You, Gamecock, are apparently also unaware that the USSR could not have defeated those German divisions without US aid. To take but one of many examples, Khrushchev admitted that the Red Army could not even have traveled from Stalingrad to Berlin, let alone fought its way there, without the hundreds of thousands of trucks, jeeps & tanks we sent them. This largess should have stopped when the USSR let Germany destroy the Polish Home Army, but it didn’t. It kept flowing even after the US & UK needed those vehicles in France, lack of which slowed our advance. To this add vast bounty in food, boots, aircraft, steel, you name it, most sent at great cost in lives & treasure on the deadly Murmansk Run.

    Britain would have been starved into submission in 1940 & 1941 by German forces in the Battle of the Atlantic without US aid in merchant seamen & ships, naval escorts, Royal Navy ship repair, Lend Lease supplies, food & materiel. Not to mention volunteers & av gas in the Battle of Britain & planes & superior tanks in the Desert.

    Once in the war, the US-UK invasion of Sicily forced Hitler to call off his Kursk offensive, & the Soviet success in its Belorussian campaign owed to the D-Day landings.

    But more importantly, it was French & British pacifism (understandable after the horrors of the Great War) & appeasement in 1936-38, plus Soviet collusion with Hitler in 1939-41, that let the war start in the first place. Before that, the punitive terms of the Versailles Treaty insisted upon by France aided Hitler’s rise to power.

    The other Allies could not have won without the US, so yes, Americans can indeed take credit. You’re welcome. Twice.

  74. Bob B says:

    I think as long as the CAGW wacko’s keep trying to control the narrative and language calling us climate deniers, we should start calling them rightfully– “climate parasites” — because they siphon money from average taxpayers to promote their point of view:

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/02/climate_parasites_the_answer_to_climate_change_deniers.html

  75. catweazle666 says:

    Rhys Jagger: “Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war. Late to the party but demanding all the credit.”

    Oh dear Rhys, you’re a bit “special”, aren’t you?

  76. DirkH says:

    John Mann says:
    February 19, 2014 at 4:06 am
    “I’m sceptical about climate change. I’m even somewhat sceptical about Wikipedia. But if Delingpole is correct, then we have a Wikipedia article on a scientific subject which is completely and utterly misleading.”

    That’s par for the course for wikipedia. Look up John Holdren. In 1975 or so he co-authored a mighty tome, EcoScience, with the Ehrlichs. Now try to find the wikipedia page about EcoScience. There is none. It is a legendary book where Ehrlichs and Holdren discussed all coercive and non-coercive ways to bring down the population to 1 billion.

    If you thought the wikipedia’s “NPOV” means that wikipedia’s “neutral”… well… need a bridge?

    For another take on acid rain see also Bjorn Lomborg’s The Skeptical Environmentalist. He also has something else to say than the wikipedia.

    Wikipedia is always, always conformist.

  77. milodonharlani says:

    rogerknights says:
    February 19, 2014 at 5:31 am

    Piltdown’s post-doc fellowship, during which the SLAPP-happy trickster concocted the Hockey Stick, was funded by a US Dept. of Energy grant.

  78. DirkH says:

    Bart says:
    February 19, 2014 at 2:59 am
    “I say, you don’t give credit to the guys who helped start the fire. In my book, the Brits were the real heroes.”

    The Brits surely did “help to start the fire”. Without going into details, they had their motive; competition; a desire to save their empire (which obviously failed).
    “Germany is too strong. We must destroy her.” — Winston Churchill, November, 1936.

  79. DirkH says:

    Ian H says:
    February 19, 2014 at 1:52 am
    “Unfortunately Breitbart isn’t a real news agency”

    There’s always Thomson-Reuters for all your Global Warming needs. (Had Crispin Tickell on the board of trustees, now replaced with Pascal Lamy.)

  80. eyesonu says:

    Looks like Delingpole is off to a good start over at Breitbart. On the post about sharks there is now over 600 comments.

    Good luck James. You were the reason that I would visit the Telegraph. Dropped one bookmark and added one.

  81. milodonharlani says:

    DirkH says:
    February 19, 2014 at 6:03 am

    British and French pacifism (understandable after the horrors of the Great War) & appeasement, 1936-38, plus Soviet collusion with HItler, 1939-41, allowed the war to start. Without US aid & alliance, the western powers & the USSR could not have won the war. Britain would have been starved into submission & her lifeline to India cut, then the western Soviet Union occupied by Germany in a one front war.

  82. Klaas de Waal says:

    Are we really glorifying someone who wrote a piece of sh*t column in which he suggests that we should kill sharks, just because some spoiled little *sshole want to surf? How low can you go??

    REPLY: The opposite argument is – are we really going to pay attention to somebody that uses two cuss words in a single sentence to get a point across because they have no cognizant argument? I think not. – Anthony

  83. Fred Souder says:

    Anthony,
    Could you please post a blog detailing your abdominal workouts and diet?
    My wife has been riding me about getting back into shape and it seems to be working for you.

  84. Rathnakumar says:

    Thank you for the alert on Mr. Delingpole’s new blog, Mr. Watts!

  85. Mike says:

    Unfortunately the Telegraph publishes the absolutely brilliant cartoon “Matt” so I have to go there once a day (n.b. knowledge of current British affairs is a prerequisite to getting the jokes). I now just skip the rest of this once fine paper.

  86. eyesonu says:

    John Tillman says:
    February 19, 2014 at 5:49 am

    =============

    Good response.

    My grandfather made numerous crossings through the north sea supplying the Russians. The convoys lost ships. It was a matter of whether your ship was going to be the one sunk or the one travelling next to you. The real targets were the merchant marine ships. Those supplies were critical to the Russians survival.

  87. Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7 says:

    I realize the doctored picture is from The Spartans at Thermopylae, but given the three recognizable figures in the foreground, perhaps Lord Macaulay’sHoratius at the Bridge is a more appropriate reference:

    Hew down the bridge, Sir Consul,
    With all the speed ye may;
    I, with two more to help me,
    Will hold the foe in play.
    In yon strait path a thousand
    May well be stopped by three:
    Now who will stand on either hand,
    And keep the bridge with me?

    (Actually this poem is a lot longer than I remembered it)

  88. Gail Combs says:

    Rhys Jaggar says: @ February 18, 2014 at 11:17 pm

    ….Delingpole was late to the Climate Change Party and thinks that it started with ‘Climategate’….
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
    At least he woke up when hit over the head by some facts and has the integrity to write and publish those facts.

    Most news media writers are bought and paid for and if they do not stay bought they get fired.

    We farmers learned that the hard way during the ‘Farm Wars’ a decade ago.

    HE who OWNS the press controls the press not the writers, and most media is owned by large corporations who have bankers on the board of directors.

    You can do the digging yourself. The major news and other corporations have officers and the board of directors published on-line.

    There is also this: The Network of Global Corporate Control which is also published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis The Network of Global Corporate Control (If you have criticism of that “sad little paper” _Jim you can give your corrections @ that website.)

  89. David L. says:

    Gamecock says:
    February 19, 2014 at 5:00 am
    The Allied victory in WWII was a team effort. Here is an important statistic: 7/8 of German division months were in the east. The battle in the east dwarfed the battle in the west. But many Americans have no knowledge at all of the war in the east, and think we won WWII. So Rhys Jaggar’s comment about “a typical American” is a fair comment.

    ———–
    And you my Eurocentric friend forget all about the war in the Pacific. Please explain those details to us (hint….it’s in the east, and Japan is over there)

  90. MarkW says:

    I find it fascinating the way liberal publications would rather maintain ideological purity than actually make a profit.
    I suppose they believe that they will be rewarded by their allies in the govt for their sacrifices.
    Unfortunately, they are probably correct.

  91. richardscourtney says:

    DirkH:

    It would be helpful if you desisted from taking every opportunity to pretend that H1tler was some kind of misunderstood and left-wing ‘good guy’ who was dragged into war by the British.

    In reality, H1tler was an evil right-wing tyrant who set out his plans for world domination in a book, and the British thought the horrors of WW1 were so great that nobody would want another war. The British were still trying appeasement and disarming while H1tler was invading Poland.

    The defeat of H1tler was a team effort by the British, the British Empire, the USSR and the USA. Without the involvement of each of these it is possible that H1tler would have won.

    The costs were great for all combatants but the benefits were greatest for the USA; e.g. the British were still paying to the US in the present century.

    And, importantly, none of that has any relevance to Delingpole moving from the Telegraph to Breitbart-London.

    Richard

  92. John Mann says:

    DirkH

    If you thought the wikipedia’s “NPOV” means that wikipedia’s “neutral”… well… need a bridge?

    For another take on acid rain see also Bjorn Lomborg’s The Skeptical Environmentalist. He also has something else to say than the wikipedia.

    Wikipedia is always, always conformist.

    I knew that it was conformist. I knew that it wasn’t strictly neutral. I knew that it was biased.

    But deliberately misleading? On an article about science?

    The article at http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/is_wikipedia_biased says “Maintaining what Wikipedia calls “the neutral point of view” (or NPOV) is relatively easy when writing about science topics or otherwise objectively verifiable subjects. But in other topics, such as politics and history, bias and controversy inevitably arise.”

    The article about Acid Raid is about a science topic. But if Delingpole is correct, it is not just biassed, it is seriously and deliberately misleading.

    Anyone with no ax to grind who reads both Delingpole and Wikipedia on Acid Rain is going to see that the Wikipedia article has 39 footnotes and decide that Delingpole is a joker.

    As for Lomborg – he wrote his book 15 years ago, and all the evidence suggests that the scientific community taken it very seriously.

  93. Ed, Mr. Jones says:

    John Mann,

    You should be extremely skeptical of Wikipedia.

  94. Gail Combs says:

    snow says:
    February 19, 2014 at 1:40 am

    …. Do our tax dollars help pay for these agw scientist research grants.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    Of course!
    The Big Winners in the Climate Change Money Game

    Federal Climate Change Funding from FY2008 to FY2014 (20 page .PDF report)
    https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43227.pdf
    (I have not opened that PDF. It is from:
    http://us.resiliencesystem.org/federal-climate-change-expenditures-report-congress

    Also see Jo Nova’s The climate industry wall of money

    “Money for the Climate Industry: The US government spent $79 billion on climate research and technology since 1989… the Australian Government put $13.9 million into just one quick advertising campaign.”

    There is more information if you sift through THIS.

    Even the World Wildlife Fund, Inc., an arm of World Wildlife Fund International gets government grants. From Donna Laframboise The WWF’s Vast Pool of Oil Money
    “The World Wildlife Fund’s first corporate sponsor was Shell oil – which continued to fund it for the next four decades.” not surprising given The Royals of the Netherlands own a large chunk of Shell and HRH Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands was the first president of WWF.

  95. milodonharlani says:

    richardscourtney says:
    February 19, 2014 at 7:26 am

    The US post-war loan at low interest rate was less than the value of Lend Lease write-down to ten cents on the dollar & Marshal Plan aid to the UK.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-American_loan

    Bankrupt Britain got a heck of a deal, but Marshal Plan aid was squandered by Labour.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/marshall_01.shtml

    US aid was critical for the Commonwealth & other allies, to include France & its colonies & Italy, once those nations joined or rejoined the allies. Without it, neither the USSR nor Britain could have defeated Germany. The UK would have been starved into surrender before Germany turned on its erstwhile ally the USSR. Stalin would have lost even sooner with Japan attacking in the east at the same time as Germany in the west. Transferring crack cold-WX Siberian divisions west, thanks to Soviet spy Sorge’s report on Tokyo’s decision to attack the US, saved Moscow.

    Communist agents like Harry D. White in FDR´s administration engineered the shift in Japanese strategy by cutting off the supply of US oil, scrap iron, etc. The previous Japanese Foreign Minister grew up & was educated in Oregon, so knew not to attack the US. He urged joining Germany against the USSR, but the army was wary after its 1939 experience against Zhukov in Mongolia. The new FM sided with those who favored the “Southern” strategy, aimed at Dutch East Indian oil.

    Agree Richard, I’ve yet again wandered off topic, but felt the calumnious charges needed an answer. If the US had stayed out of the First World War, maybe there would have been a peace settlement & the Soviet Union & NazI control of Germany might never have happened.

    Australia has shown the alliance the way forward toward victory in the war against the anti-human Green Shirts. Here’s hoping that Canada, the UK & US follow the lead of Oz away from the emerald slough.

  96. milodonharlani says:

    PS; In a lame attempt to make WWII more relevant, I recommend Delingpole´s Coward series of novels.

  97. MikeP says:

    How about updating the Delingpole link on the sidebar? It still points at the Telegraph :(

  98. Alan the Brit says:

    Bart says:
    February 19, 2014 at 2:59 am

    Rhys Jaggar says:
    February 18, 2014 at 11:17 pm

    “Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war.”

    Mmmmm… Unh-uh.

    Alan the Brit says:
    February 19, 2014 at 2:12 am

    Well, yes, we do feel we played a key role. But, many of us are well aware that Britain was sine qua non. Had the Brits not held virtually alone in the darkest days, there would have been no safe routes for American troops and material to arrive.

    I’ve had arguments with friends who insist that, by virtue of suffering the most, the Soviet Union really won the war, you don’t give credit to the guys who helped start the fire. In my book, the Brits were the real heroes.

    This has unfortunately gone off topic & for that I apologise. Richard S. Courtney is right, this has nothing to do with JD’s move.

    I will say this, the points made about what the US contributed are valid, but Britain was also supplying the Soviet Union with equipment via the Arctic Convoys through treacherous bitterly cold seas to do so (something only now in the UK is shamefully being acknowledged). Curiously enough the UNIPCC acknowledges that the Arctic was warmer than it is today back in the 1940s, although I suspect those who served in those convoys may not agree from a certain viewpoint! Finally, what Britain & the USA did in the West may not have compared in size or scale to those events in the east, at least our troops were motivated by a sense of freedom & democracy, not a bullet in the head for refusing to commit open suicide, the Russians were brutally savage as much with there own people as with the enemy!

  99. richardscourtney says:

    John Mann:

    re your post at February 19, 2014 at 7:28 am.

    Delingpole is right about the ‘acid Rain’ scare. Simply, ‘waldsterben’ (i.e. forest death) was not happening; it is now known that the forests were expanding at the time.

    The best account of the false ‘Acid Rain’ scare is the paper by Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen (it is better than both of my papers on the subject). Every account of every environmental issue on wicki. should be distrusted because the C0nolley effect is severe.

    Richard

  100. daddylonglegs says:

    John Tillman says:
    February 19, 2014 at 5:49 am

    Gamecock says:
    February 19, 2014 at 5:00 am
    The Allied victory in WWII was a team effort. Here is an important statistic: 7/8 of German division months were in the east. The battle in the east dwarfed the battle in the west. But many Americans have no knowledge at all of the war in the east, and think we won WWII. So Rhys Jaggar’s comment about “a typical American” is a fair comment.

    Rhys Jaggar’s comment isn’t fair. It’s ignorant. Delingpole is not an American.

    You, Gamecock, are apparently also unaware that the USSR could not have defeated those German divisions without US aid. To take but one of many examples, Khrushchev admitted that the Red Army could not even have traveled from Stalingrad to Berlin, let alone fought its way there, without the hundreds of thousands of trucks, jeeps & tanks we sent them. This largess should have stopped when the USSR let Germany destroy the Polish Home Army, but it didn’t. It kept flowing even after the US & UK needed those vehicles in France, lack of which slowed our advance. To this add vast bounty in food, boots, aircraft, steel, you name it, most sent at great cost in lives & treasure on the deadly Murmansk Run.

    Britain would have been starved into submission in 1940 & 1941 by German forces in the Battle of the Atlantic without US aid in merchant seamen & ships, naval escorts, Royal Navy ship repair, Lend Lease supplies, food & materiel. Not to mention volunteers & av gas in the Battle of Britain & planes & superior tanks in the Desert.

    Since we’ve been dragged into another WW2 discussion here’s my pennyworth:

    America were certainly the biggest winners from the war. But neither in the Pacific nor in Europe they was the USA the principle or even largest protagonist. Japan’s commitment of troops against America was smaller than against China. And Germany’s effort against the western allies was dwarfed by that against Russia.

    Talking about transport, Russia indeed relied on American vehicles just as Germany – initially much less mechanized than the western allied and more reliant on horses – rode into Russia mostly in French vehicles captured by the surrender by France of an almost pristine war inventory. Barbarossa was almost Franco-German (as the eventual defence of the Reich was Franco-Belgian-German etc.) – a true foretaste of the European Union.

    It must be clarified, sadly, that the British Arctic convoys, though supremely heroic, were insignificant to Russia’s war effort compared to the American imports by rail via Iran (“Persia”). It was the wrong sort of material and too little and in the wrong place.

    It was more luck than destiny that America both joined the war and joined on the side of England. There is nothing new about loathing of British in America. As documented in the recent book “those angry days” by Lynne Olson, in the pre-war years there was a sizeable faction in the USA which sided with Germany not England, including most notably Charles Lindbergh. In China the USA’s vision was so blinded by the mist of Anglophobia (especially that of general Joseph Stilwell) that they believed the good guys were Mao and the communists and worked against the British army in Burma. Towards the end of the European war America sided increasingly with Stalin against Churchill. An yes – Britain only stopped paying interest to the USA for war debt less than a decade ago.

    DirkH – with all due respect you cant argue Britain was in any way a protagonist for WW2 except after the war had already been made inevitable – by Germany. Whatever he might have said in 1936, at that time he was as marginal a figure in British politics as James Delingpole is today.

    As for England’s code-breakers, yes they were clever chaps, but Stalin had no need of any British communication to him of the Bletchley Park code-breaking output since Britain was thoroughly infiltrated by Soviet spies. Russia began the cold war before WW2 had ended, Churchill and the western leaders were laughably naïve in this respect, not realizing for instance that at conferences such as Yalta and Teheran all their rooms were bugged – by Stalin’s own son. (When Churchill told Stalin of the atom bomb he was looking forward to a big reaction. When there was none he thought Stalin did not understand. But he probably had known of it before Churchill.)

    As for the Soviets being so heroic, recent research has made it clear that in the absence of confrontation with US and British troops, they had plans to advance all the way to the English channel and into Italy.

    A good source of info on all this is the new book by Anthony Beevor, the history of ww2.

  101. Gail Combs says:

    Jack C says: @ February 19, 2014 at 3:05 am

    I am hoping James will skewer the Greens over this piece of Stalinism:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26187711
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I just lost my breakfast.

    So much for freedom of speech and thought. The greens are revealing how ‘different’ they are from all the other totalitarians responsible for DEMOCIDE – Death by Government

    Given the number of UK people who died from ‘Green Policies’ it is just another method of Democide. Dead is dead.

  102. Tom G(ologist) says:

    My wife and father in law are both journalists – well, my wife WAS, but she found she could make a LOT more as, wait for it…… a violin instructor. Actually she teaches Celtic Fiddling AND violin at a college near home as well as a home studio, and THAT pays better than being a full time journalist did. My father in law is retired.

    Both, BTW are appalled at the way there is no reporting on the actual story behind things such as ClimateGate and other juicy follow-ups. To them, those are news. There are salable stories and they are incredulous that there is virtually nothing said about the bad bahaviour of AGW champions.

    /the unbiased American Press.. Yeah, right.

  103. rogerknights says:

    Rhys Jaggar says:
    February 18, 2014 at 11:17 pm

    Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war. Late to the party but demanding all the credit.

    The reason America resisted getting involved in helping Britain and France is that their prime ministers had overruled Pres. Wilson at Versailles and insisted on a victor’s peace, not one based on his 14 points–which the Germans were relying on when they agreed to an armistice. They thereby sowed the whirlwind, as Keynes predicted at the time.

    Americans felt that France and Britain had betrayed America too at Versailles–so why should we help them? This was not a big-picture, statesmanlike POV; but Britons who blame Americans for being late should bear in mind their country’s culpability in our reluctance.

  104. rogerknights says:

    PS: An incredible book on WW2 in Europe is British journalist Max Hastings’ Armageddon: The Battle for Germany, 1944¬-1945

  105. milodonharlani says:

    daddylonglegs says:
    February 19, 2014 at 8:23 am

    Technically it wasn’t war debt repaid but post-war. The Anglo-American Loan was from 1946.

    But for the FDR administration engineering Japan into attacking us, isolationist sentiment might have kept us out of the war. Had Germany & Japan then dominated Eurasia, 15 million rather than five million Jews would have been exterminated.

    Had we belatedly gotten in after a British surrender & Soviet defeat, Germany & Japan could have been destroyed by longer ranged bombers on the drawing boards armed with atomic bombs. Germany was the original target.

  106. _Jim says:

    Bravo, Delingpole, BRAVO!

  107. milodonharlani says:

    eyesonu says:
    February 19, 2014 at 6:59 am

    Thanks for your grandfather’s service. The losses of merchant mariners are often overlooked, 9500 US & I don’t know how many British or Commonwealth.

    My dad was a Marine Corps Corsair fighter pilot, but didn’t see squadron service.

  108. anticlimactic says:

    You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life. – Winston Churchill

  109. u can get some insight what is going on at the DT in Private Eye.

  110. John Mann says:

    Richard Courtney,

    Thanks for that. Would that be the book “Acid Politics” – or is there another paper?

    Basically, the problem is that non-specialists are going to say “Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen says one thing, but that is a heterodox opinion.” Connolley represents orthodoxy. So when the average person reads Delingpole’s book, why would he take it seriously if he then has a quick look at Wikipedia?

    I don’t doubt that Wikipedia is biased. The way one checks it, of course, is to read what it says about something one knows something about. So, to take two examples, I’d have to say that the article about Andrew Montford and the one about his book “The Hockey Stick Illusion” seem to be pretty fair to me. So how do does the non-specialist know that the one about Acid Rain is misleading?

    John

  111. John@EF says:

    Delingpole … exactly were he belongs. Political loony land. Both right and left varieties are embarrassments.

  112. _Jim says:

    Ian H says February 19, 2014 at 1:52 am

    Unfortunately Breitbart isn’t a real news agency, just a right wing propaganda website.

    Really? Can you cite a specific piece ‘prop’ to support that assertion?

    Note: Disagreeing with MSNBC or Think Progress or other heavy lefty orgs does not qualify as propaganda except in the eye of the beholder.

    PS “News is where you find it.” Quote or cite me on that, as often as you see fit.

    .

  113. _Jim says:

    John@EF says February 19, 2014 at 9:25 am

    Delingpole … exactly were he belongs. Political loony land.

    You find NPR, the BBC or MSNBC to be rationale?

    It’s just a question … after all, these ‘places’ are veritable sellouts to CAGW, a subject requiring GREAT FAITH in the MANN and his dogma, where rationality and challenge of the facts need not raise it’s head nor ask a pertinent question …

    .

  114. richardscourtney says:

    John Mann:

    At February 19, 2014 at 9:17 am you ask me

    I don’t doubt that Wikipedia is biased. The way one checks it, of course, is to read what it says about something one knows something about. So, to take two examples, I’d have to say that the article about Andrew Montford and the one about his book “The Hockey Stick Illusion” seem to be pretty fair to me. So how do does the non-specialist know that the one about Acid Rain is misleading?

    You cannot know, and that is why academics ban the use of wicki as a source for use by students.

    As to the ‘Acid Rain’ scare, we are in danger of going wildly off-topic. It was Sonja’s PhD thesis I was commending: it is brilliant. I have reported my involvement in the matter on WUWT in a few threads so you may be able to search for it.

    Richard

  115. _Jim says:

    Gail Combs says February 19, 2014 at 7:11 am

    There is also this: The Network of Global Corporate Control which is also published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis The Network of Global Corporate Control (If you have criticism of that “sad little paper” _Jim you can give your corrections @ that website.)

    Does little good when the misinformation appears here; owed to someone who sees ‘corporatists’ and specific, planned, intentional mal-intent ‘perched’ and ready to spring from behind every rock (close to how the saying used to go …)

    .

  116. RichardLH says:

    daddylonglegs says:
    February 19, 2014 at 8:23 am

    “As for England’s code-breakers, yes they were clever chaps, but Stalin had no need of any British communication to him of the Bletchley Park code-breaking output since Britain was thoroughly infiltrated by Soviet spies.”

    Given that the Soviets apparently re-used quite a bit of the technology they captured from the Germans you might like to consider why it was that Tutte and Flowers were kept under the blanket for so long.

    The Soviets may have penetrated Whitehall quite a lot, they did less well of the coal face of SigInt.

    P.S. Every wondered why you never heard of them?

  117. John Mann says:
    February 19, 2014 at 7:28 am

    Anyone with no ax to grind who reads both Delingpole and Wikipedia on Acid Rain is going to see that the Wikipedia article has 39 footnotes and decide that Delingpole is a joker.

    My copy of The Fairie Queen has thousands of footnotes & end notes (to say nothing of line notes). As I clearly have no axe to grind, I must say it’s more authoritative on the issues of communism, environmentalism, feminism, fascism, warfare, monarchy, human sexuality, slavery, robotics, horsemanship, fencing, & gastronomy than anything you’ve ever read, written, or referenced in your entire life. QED.

  118. Vince Causey says:

    Good to see Deli is still in the public eye, still baiting those Greens.

    I noticed his output had dropped off a bit in recent months, so I’m not too surprised he’s moved on. To be honest, not heard of Breitbart before, so just flitted over there for a good perusal. Certainly full of “red meat conservatism,” and looks to be filling a gap in the market since the increasing wetness of the traditional conservative press – yes DT, I’m talking about you.

    Whether Breitbart takes off over here, remains to be seen, but I wish them well.

  119. MarkW says:

    Ian H says:
    February 19, 2014 at 1:52 am
    Unfortunately Breitbart isn’t a real news agency,
    —-
    Neither is the Telegraph, BBC, or most other members of the MSM.

  120. Tom Anderson says:

    I concur with the lament that Delingpole has been marginalized by relegation to a less popular, albeit agreeably clearsighted and combative, medium. But no matter how supportive and congenial Breitbart is, preaching to the choir is no less irrelevant for skepticism than for true belief. That’s a shame and a big loss. Delingpole is an absolutely brilliant satirist, epitomizing the best of the school, from Voltaire and Swift to Wilde and Mark Twain. He belongs to the world: our world. Ecrasez l’infame, James!

    He also deserves — needs — much better exposure. I sincerely hope his new publisher has the enterprise, push and resourcefulness to get Delingpole’s columns syndicated in every newspaper, popular journal, and website that has the good sense, honesty and integrity to run them.

    How about it, Breitbart? Will you do the honorable, the right thing, and broadcast his words?

  121. MarkW says:

    John Mann says:
    February 19, 2014 at 4:06 am
    —-
    Wikipedia is worse than useless for any subject that is controversial, especially involving the environment.

    There never was any science behind the acid rain myth.
    It was just the scare story for that decade.

  122. MarkW says:

    richardscourtney says:
    February 19, 2014 at 7:26 am
    —-
    Fascism is a form of socialism, there is nothing right wing about it.

  123. MarkW says:

    John Mann says:
    February 19, 2014 at 7:28 am
    —-
    The IPCC claims to be writting about science and has lots of footnotes to boot.
    Should we therefore just accept everything they say?

  124. Lou says:

    Ian H says:
    February 19, 2014 at 1:52 am
    Unfortunately Breitbart isn’t a real news agency, just a right wing propaganda website. Maybe he can write stories about the Friends of Hamas.

    You are smoking crack. Read Breitbart’s book Righteous Indignation to find out why it was created in the first place. All MSM but Fox News are controlled by liberal people…

  125. dbstealey says:

    MarkW says:

    “There never was any science behind the acid rain myth.”

    My favorite is the killer bees. Then there’s Y2K, ALAR on apples, and the current mindless scare: “carbon”.

  126. richardscourtney says:

    MarkW:

    At February 19, 2014 at 10:36 am you say to me

    Fascism is a form of socialism, there is nothing right wing about it.

    OK. I understand that is your belief. Are you selective in your surreal beliefs or is that your only daft one? For example, do you also believe that Father Christmas exists and he climbs down chimneys to steal toys from children?

    Richard

  127. Theo Goodwin says:

    Delingpole is wonderful. His polemics are a gift to the ages. I am glad he is with the Breitbart organizsation. I guess Britain was not ready for a James Dean of journalism.

  128. Alcheson says:

    ” MarkW says:
    February 19, 2014 at 10:36 am

    richardscourtney says:
    February 19, 2014 at 7:26 am
    —-
    Fascism is a form of socialism, there is nothing right wing about it.”

    Agreed…. Hitler was NOT Right Wing. That is a very big falsehood the left is always
    trying to pass off as truth. He was one of theirs.

  129. richardscourtney says:

    Friends:

    The series of assertions by representatives of the ultra-right that H1tler was not right-wing are not only daft, they are also completely off-topic. I understand the embarrassment of the ultra-right at the most infamous of right-wingers, but attempts to pretend H1tler was not right wing are mere pollution of this thread and have no place here.

    Richard

  130. Zeke says:

    MarkW says, “Fascism is a form of socialism, there is nothing right wing about it.”

    For purposes of clarity, when discussing the National Socialist Party of Germany, it may help to itemize actual policies that most characterize that movement from your perspective. Here is a start:

    1. national gun registry and control
    2. Nationalized health care
    3. Antisemitism
    4. Eugenics/Population control
    5. Nationalized schools
    6. top-down agrarian reforms
    7. demands of worker ownership of production
    8. nationalized Sunday programs for youth, to replace church

    I suggest a list form to avoid the use of meaningless terms such as “right wing,” and I have offered an example to communicate precisely what the policies were. Please feel free to discuss your views, as there is nothing against WUWT site policy in them, and richardscourtney is not a moderator. He does not have any more authority than you do to decide what is on- or off- topic. The site policies are under “About/Policy,” if you think there is a subject that might not be welcome on a thread.

  131. milodonharlani says:

    richardscourtney says:
    February 19, 2014 at 11:13 am

    Mussolini, founder of Fascism, was & always remained a socialist, to mention but one similarity. Socialism, fascism & communism are all statist doctrines stemming from 19th & early 20th century socialism (of both the dialectical materialism & Fabian strains). The opposite of socialism is not anarchism (anti-statism), but libertarianism, ie freedom under law, with power spread as broadly as possible among local, regional & national public regimes & private & volunteer community organizations, families & individuals, with state power also divided among separate branches of government, instead of concentrated in one branch at the national level. This contrasts with the all-powerful parliaments & bureaucracies of socialist Europe, all subject to a supranational authority without appeal.

    So I would not dismiss MarkW’s assertion as fantastic. It’s a defensible position with which IMO few historians of socialism would disagree, however much they might dislike Marx´& Mussolini´s brands of socialism.

  132. alcheson says:

    Richard…. FYI. The National Socialist Workers Party of Germany, otherwise known as the Nazi Party, was indeed socialist, and it had a lot in common with the modern left. Hitler preached class warfare, agitating the working class to resist “exploitation” by capitalists — particularly Jewish capitalists, of course. Their program called for the nationalization of education, health care, transportation, and other major industries. They instituted and vigorously enforced a strict gun control regimen.

  133. Ox AO says:

    @Bob B: climate deniers vs “climate parasites”

    They use Orwellian upside down tactics to win an arguments such as:
    Down is up and up is down.

    1. classical meaning of liberal = freedom. Today it means statism.

    2. Classical meaning of progressivism = to move forward. Today it means too slow down.

    3. Classical meaning of Climate deniers = Earth Climate doesn’t change classical progressivism creates the change. Today it means Earth climate changes classical progressivism doesn’t. The Orwellian would say, Those that oppose progressivism is what causes the earth to change.

    There is a whole list of new definitions to our Orwellian world we live today. My favorite word when Bob Hope was around was the word, Gay.

    How can we win against their liberal power to change our language and manipulate the way we think? The whole climate denier statement is gay.

  134. alcheson says:

    BTW….. Love Delingpole…. will be buying his book :-)

  135. richardscourtney says:

    Friends:

    Can anybody explain to me the relevance to this thread of WW1, WW2, H1tler, and right-wing misrepresentations of history and of politics?

    Some people clearly think that this thread is about those subjects and I fail to understand why.

    Richard

  136. alcheson says:

    Whether it be global warming or some other falsehood promulgated against people of a more “freedom-loving” persuasion, need to correct these errors when they occur.

  137. David G says:

    Rhys Jagger, So you think our conduct of the war should have been tied to the likes of the treacherous obstreperous Poles, Do you? Your Polish heroes who jumped on the Czechs when they were sole the focus of the fuehrer’s fury in 1938? Too stupid to realize what was coming for them, they thought they’d grab a little more territory while the Czechs were occoppied so to speak.. And when the Jewish ghetto of Warsaw rose in revolt the Poles were no where to be found. The Russians did far more to win the war than the Poles, who ony managed to start it.:]

  138. RichardLH says:

    richardscourtney says:
    February 19, 2014 at 12:07 pm

    “Can anybody explain to me the relevance to this thread of WW1, WW2, H1tler, and right-wing misrepresentations of history and of politics?

    Some people clearly think that this thread is about those subjects and I fail to understand why.”

    The problem with a commentator moving from a right wing paper (The Telegraph) into a right wing online paper (Breitbart) I suspect.

    People will the bring up other right wing stuff (actually quite inappropriately in some cases).

    I try to keep peoples politics out of their science but…..

  139. Specter says:

    “1. national gun registry and control
    2. Nationalized health care
    3. Antisemitism
    4. Eugenics/Population control
    5. Nationalized schools
    6. top-down agrarian reforms
    7. demands of worker ownership of production
    8. nationalized Sunday programs for youth, to replace church”

    Looks more like left wing agenda to me.

  140. Eric says:

    Should give Breitbart.com some link juice then by changing the link in the right sidebar.

  141. milodonharlani says:

    richardscourtney says:
    February 19, 2014 at 12:07 pm

    Ask Rhys Jagger & Gamecock why they felt compelled to disparage the US contribution to fighting Fascism, not to mention Communism. One or the other or both Hegelian regimes, the German & Russian varieties, would still be ruling Europe without American intervention. The US is returning to isolationism, so we’ll see how that works out for the world.

  142. Tom Englert says:

    Gamecock says:
    February 19, 2014 at 5:00 am

    The fact that German war efforts were concentrated in the East is because that area was the main interest of their desire for lebensraum. In the West, it was only a matter of a few months to finish off most of Western Europe. There was little need for military ground action in Western Europe from mid 1940 until mid 1944 (with a few exceptions at the fringes like Italy, Africa, Greece, Yugoslavia, it was mostly air war).

    Also note that the USSR didn’t bother with Japan until the war was a few days from ending. The USSR would have had little chance of success without Allied war materiel and massive strategic errors on the part of Germany’s fearless leader.

  143. Bryan A says:

    Little Green Eco-Fascists or
    Little Brown Eco-Fashites

  144. polski says:

    John Tillman says:
    February 19, 2014 at 5:49 am
    “But more importantly, it was French & British pacifism (understandable after the horrors of the Great War) & appeasement in 1936-38, plus Soviet collusion with Hitler in 1939-41, that let the war start in the first place. Before that, the punitive terms of the Versailles Treaty insisted upon by France aided Hitler’s rise to power.”

    Stalin broke five alliances with other nations and started one up with Hitler to take over Poland and other Baltic states. His help surely made the war far easier for Hitler and the savaging by Stalin’s NKVD must have made the Gestapo proud.
    http://uralica.com/eastbalt.htm

    I am a little sensitive on this issue…re my handle

  145. Lew Skannen says:

    OK so judging by the comments Delingpole started WW2. Glad we have sorted that out….

  146. J says:

    Richard,

    Thanks for your post of February 19, 2014 at 9:33 am, and my apologies for appearing to go off topic.

    (FWIW, I don’t think I was completely off topic. My point was that Delingpole may speak the truth, but the way he does it really is not calculated to win over those who start out accepting the current orthodoxy. Most people who accept the current orthodoxy on AGW and acid rain, but who are reasonably open minded, would pick up Delingpole’s Little Green Book and after a quick skim, dismiss it as quickly as they would dismiss a Ken Ham creationist tome. However – an open minded observer, who sat down and read Andrew Montfort, on the other hand, would be much more likely to question their own prior assumptions. You and I may take the view that Delingpole knows what he is talking about, but I know several people who would simply dismiss him on the basis of the Little Green Book. And in particular, they would not take his perspective on acid rain seriously because what the standard sources say bears no resemblance to what Delingpole is saying.)

    John

  147. John Mann says:

    Richard,
    The comment above was from me.

  148. milodonharlani says:

    Lew Skannen says:
    February 19, 2014 at 12:45 pm

    No, but he has written winningly upon it, as I commented above. I´ve been waiting for Coward in Burma or some such follow on to the first two:

  149. goldminor says:

    Truthseeker says:
    February 18, 2014 at 11:04 pm
    —————————————–
    Much of the msm has crap coverage on almost every article. Maybe I could hire out as a proofreader. The basic mistakes are mind boggling. The other day I gave up on reading at msnbc permanently. Their rag is now pathetic. Every day you can read a new story about the rich getting richer, women getting poorer, what the rich can do that you can’t, etc, etc, etc,etc, ad nauseum.

  150. milodonharlani says:

    polski says:
    February 19, 2014 at 12:39 pm

    Stalin was planning to attack HItler in 1942, but the Germans beat him to the draw. Soviet forces were placed far too close to the border as a result of the Red Army’s offensive positions, & easily overrun & surrounded.

    Not only did Stalin divide up Poland with his new best temporary buddy Adolf, but he murdered 22,000 Polish officers & intelligentsia at Katyn & other slaughter sites. Then when the Red Army fought its way back to the Vistula, he stopped it in September 1944 to let the Germans destroy the Polish Home Army in Warsaw by Oct 2.

  151. Ox AO says:

    richardscourtney says:

    said, “Can anybody explain to me the relevance to this thread of WW1, WW2, H1tler, and right left-wing misrepresentations of history and of politics?”

    Rhys Jaggar says:
    “Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war. Late to the party but demanding all the credit.”

    Because of Jaggar anti-American statement?
    I would suggest reading it first. The statement about right-wing shows you didn’t read the thread.
    Which also means you will read my post either. What is the point?

  152. milodonharlani says:

    And then the Communists in FDR’s administration sold Poland down the river at Yalta.

    History not irrelevant to the Ukraine today.

  153. John Mann says:

    Richard,
    My earlier comment, thanking you for your reply, seems not to have been published.
    John

  154. Box of Rocks says:

    Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war. Late to the party but demanding all the credit.

    Personally I think it is past time that the Europeans quit suck at the teat of American prosperity and fund their own health care systems including drugs and their own security.

    Next time it would be wise if the USA stayed on the sidelines.

    Putin is your next best friend anyway.

    And why did Patton get fired?

  155. RichardLH says:

    richardscourtney says:

    said, “Can anybody explain to me the relevance to this thread of WW1, WW2, H1tler, and right left-wing misrepresentations of history and of politics?”

    Given that Delingpole writing ahs been described thus, are you surprised at the WW2 refs?

    Coward at the Bridge
    Dick Coward Series, Book 2
    Series:
    Dick Coward
    Creators:
    James Delingpole
    Publisher:
    Simon & Schuster UK

    Description:

    Trapped in a cupboard with a nubile blonde nymphomaniac; crossing the Waal under a hail of fire with the US paratroops of 82nd airborne; rattling in a jeep through the Dutch countryside with the men of 1st Airborne Recce Squadron; trying to take out a self-propelled gun with a ruddy useless PIAT. It’s all in a day’s work for Lt Dick Coward and Sgt Tom Price on their second published adventure.
    After the horrors of D-Day, they find themselves plunged into even greater chaos and mayhem as they land in the deceptively tranquil countryside around Arnhem, Holland, as part of Operation Market Garden. What should be a pushover – the ingenious scheme that everyone thinks will end the war by Christmas – turns into Britain’s biggest military disaster of the Second World War. But if it’s a cock-up, by golly is it a glorious one. Rarely if ever have Allied soldiers acquitted themselves better than the British, Americans and Poles, as they fought against the might of the SS, in their bid to capture ‘The Bridge Too Far.”
    As usual Coward and Price are in the thick of it. They have to be. If Coward doesn’t get a VC this time, he’ll be booted off the family estate for good, and stand no chance of winning the heart of the fickle, dangerously beguiling Gina.
    Will he get the medal? Will he get the girl? Will Price be driven so mad by his master’s Bertie Wooster-like stupidity that he ends up throttling him first?”

  156. Box of Rocks says:

    Oops – meant to say -

    quit sucking …

  157. Questing Vole says:

    From the hints about his research, it’ll be “Coward in the Bulge” – get on with it, JD!!!

  158. TRM says:

    You guys dream of being that ripped :)

  159. richardscourtney says:

    Ox AO:

    Your entire post at February 19, 2014 at 1:08 pm says

    richardscourtney says:

    said, “Can anybody explain to me the relevance to this thread of WW1, WW2, H1tler, and right left-wing misrepresentations of history and of politics?”

    Rhys Jaggar says:
    “Delingpole is a typical American joining a 20th century world war. Late to the party but demanding all the credit.”

    Because of Jaggar anti-American statement?
    I would suggest reading it first. The statement about right-wing shows you didn’t read the thread.
    Which also means you will read my post either. What is the point?

    I did read the thread and I answered some daft ultra-right wing distortions which shows you didn’t read the thread.

    None of your post has any relation to my question which it quotes unless the comparison by Rhys Jaggar touched a raw nerve. Whether or not that be true, the comparison only required a rebuttal as to the appropriateness of the comparison.

    So, one is left to ponder of your post, What is the point?

    Richard

  160. richardscourtney says:

    John Mann:

    re your post at February 19, 2014 at 1:11 pm

    No problem. I have not seen it but your message says you sent it, and I appreciate that.

    Richard

  161. James at 48 says:

    He’s got enough of the rebel hipster look that he’s actually a better fit at Breitbart. Not a legacy media guy.

  162. richardscourtney says:

    RichardLH:

    re your post to me at February 19, 2014 at 1:18 pm.

    I fail to see any relevance to this thread at all.

    Richard

  163. Gunga Din says:

    richardscourtney says:
    February 19, 2014 at 11:50 am

    Friends:

    The series of assertions by representatives of the ultra-right that H1tler was not right-wing are not only daft, they are also completely off-topic. I understand the embarrassment of the ultra-right at the most infamous of right-wingers, but attempts to pretend H1tler was not right wing are mere pollution of this thread and have no place here.

    Richard

    ====================================================================
    The problem isn’t really Left-wing, Right-wing. The problem is Totalitarianism. One group wants to control for your own good and the other wants to control for the Nation’s good. No matter how noble the intent, both want to control and only the controllers end up profiting in this life.
    Answers? In the secular realm The Declaration of Independence is a good start, Government formed to defend the individual rights of the governed.
    I think we both know what the “non-secular” answer is. (For those to object to the implications of the “non-secular” answer, please refer to the secular answer. We should all be able to live with that in the here and now)

  164. Gunga Din says:

    Yypo…er…Typo!
    “(For those to object to the implications of the “non-secular” answer, please refer to the secular answer. We should all be able to live with that in the here and now)”
    Should be:
    “(For those who object to the implications of the “non-secular” answer, please refer to the secular answer. We should all be able to live with that in the here and now.)”

  165. jones says:

    I rather like the fact that the greatest ever Brit in history was also half-American.

    Saved our bacon when others wanted to come to a deal..

  166. RichardLH says:

    richardscourtney says:
    February 19, 2014 at 1:34 pm

    “I fail to see any relevance to this thread at all.”

    Because Delinpole has written a lot of other stuff as well as his climate columns.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/James-Delingpole/e/B001OJV3ZC/ref=ntt_athr_dp_pel_1

    I would suggest that you skip the review of Fin!

    I am guilty as other of following the slightly off topic WW2 stuff but he HAS written two ‘novels’ about that as well.

  167. richardscourtney says:

    Gunga Din:

    Thankyou for your answer to me at February 19, 2014 at 1:35 pm (with addendum).

    I completely agree. But that is not my major concern.
    On this thread we have sincere people grabbing an opportunity to promote their political views while on another thread we have a troll attempting to be disruptive by promoting extremist religious views. In both cases the effect is the same; the thread loses all debate of its subject.

    This thread is about Delingpole leaving a right-of-center MSM periodical to work for a right-wing periodical with smaller readership. There are a range of issues worthy of discussion which arise from this. They all pertain to journalism, readership, and dissemination of the views of Delingpole and others with similar views.

    None of those issues has been seriously debated because – almost from the start – this thread lost contact with its subject. And that is what I have been complaining about.

    Richard

  168. M Courtney says:

    Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes describes the need for a strong central power to control the brutal impulses of the individual.
    Right wing politics accepts as inevitable (and sometimes as good) that social strata will always exist.
    The combination of the two concepts leads to a right-wing justification of authoritarian elites.
    In 1930s Germany the social strata were defined on racial grounds. But they were accepted as inevitable and just and so they were still a right-wing totalitarian state.

    Conversely, Karl Marx defined a left-wing vision where social strata are levelled out by the relentless progress of history.
    Stalin used the inevitability of social levelling as justification for enforcing the “progress” through the states of government. Thus trade unions and private agriculture were suppressed – brutally.
    1950s Russia was a left-wing totalitarian state.

    Me, I am left-wing. But I am not authoritarian and I do not stand with Stalin.
    Many here are right-wing. But that doesn’t necessarily mean you are authoritarian and so stand with Hitler.

    If you do, please let me know as I assume you don’t.

  169. Gunga Din says:

    richardscourtney says:
    February 19, 2014 at 1:55 pm

    ===================================================================
    Delingpole seems skilled at skewering his opposition. Politics aside, he’s a welcome voice in his jabs at the CAGW promoters.
    (Loved the description of Al Gore.)

  170. Gunga Din says:

    PS “Yypo” was an actual typo. But I liked it so I kept it. (Bloopers are one of my favorite forms of humor even when I make them myself.)

  171. Ox AO says:

    @richardscourtney says:

    Joseph Goebbels stated and written in the new york times on November, 28 1925. Quote: “The difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight.” Which he correct. Fascism started under Mussolini which was the editor of many Marxists news papers long before he became Prime Minister. The reasons they fight was because of their similarities. They only differ on their solutions to the ‘problem.’ I think of it like the Shiites and the Sunnies. Other wise they would be like two peas in a pod.

    you shouldn’t buy into the Orwellian up side down world.

  172. Ox AO says:

    M Courtney
    strong central power is the antithesis to what is now thought of as right wing.

    If you want to understand what the Orwellian’s call right wing. I would suggest reading or watching some Milton Friedman. Lots of great youtube videos on him.

    In the the real world we are actually the Classic liberals

  173. richardscourtney says:

    Ox AO:

    It seems you cannot desist from disrupting the thread from its subject.

    As for your post at February 19, 2014 at 2:27 pm, the fact that you use the words of Joseph Goebbels as authoritative evidence of what you think to be truth speaks for itself.

    Richard

  174. M Courtney says:

    Ox AO says at February 19, 2014 at 2:50 pm

    M Courtney
    strong central power is the antithesis to what is now thought of as right wing.

    I may have misused the paragraphs and confused the issues.

    •Strong central power is the core of authoritarianism.
    •Accepting as inevitable (and maybe as good) that society with be stratified is right-wing.

    They are not the same issue.

    And my concern is that authoritarianism is the seed of totalitarianism and the death of freedom. That is something I oppose most strongly. Most passionately. Death rather than acquiescence to that.

    My left-wing views are just my judgement of what is best. I may be wrong. So I can be a part of the loyal opposition and debate with those I disagree with.

    Confusing the two bullet points weakens political debate and the political culture that enables true democracy, in my opinion.

  175. Ox AO says:

    richardscourtney says: “Joseph Goebbels as authoritative evidence of what you think to be truth speaks for itself.”

    Goebbels Quote: “The difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight.”

    Yes, Goebbels was trying to influence communist (at the time) to believing that statement was true.
    In an attempt to unite the two. That is why Goebbels was as head of propaganda. It doesn’t mean he was wrong or lying. He obviously failed at trying to unite them.

    The term propaganda is synonyms with influence not with lying. It is another Orwellian word.

    I would love to see how this world would operate if our words were not so twisted.
    Here is a thought. Say we traveled ahead in time 1000 years. We wouldn’t be able to communicate with the people in the future. It would be some strange English dialect.

  176. _Jim says:

    richardscourtney says February 19, 2014 at 11:50 am

    The series of assertions by representatives of the ultra-right that H1tler was not right-wing are not only daft, they are also completely off-topic. I understand the embarrassment of the ultra-right at the most infamous of right-wingers, ..

    I thought we ‘done’ been over this before; some paradigms or memes die slowly, eh? Those who simply seek to control and thirst for power don’t conveniently fit into textbook-standard, narrowly defined ‘categorical’ political definitions … even ‘Communism’ isn’t/wasn’t ” commune – ism “.

    Maybe richard needs to approach this from (as we have learned later) the warped psycho-$exual perspective H!tler had, vs a straight political-orientation standpoint (as perhaps learned in grade school?); the man was mentally -er- ‘jacked-around’ (according to intel released from records released well after the war) to put it politely.

    A Psychological Analysis of Adolph … His Life and Legend
    Report by Walter C. Langer, Office of Strategic Services, Washington, D.C.
    With the collaboration of-
    Prof. Henry A. Murr, Harvard Psychological Clinic
    Dr. Ernst Kris, New School for Social Research
    Dr. Bertram D. Lawin, New York Psychoanalytic Institute
    Report, by Walter C. Langer, Office of Strategic Services, Washington, D.C.

    .

  177. Ox AO says:

    M Courtney says:
    “Accepting as inevitable (and maybe as good) that society with be stratified is right-wing.”

    No, definitely not right wing.

    I honestly believe you have a very large miss conceptions of who we are.

    Would you like for me to point you too some videos on Milton Freedmen?
    He really was the best spokes person for our way of thinking.
    Some great video’s on youtube. Just look it up.

  178. Ox AO says:

    richardscourtney says: “It seems you cannot desist from disrupting the thread from its subject.”

    You asked a question and I answered it. Not liking my answer doesn’t mean I was disrupting.

    Threads ALWAYS get diverted from topic. It is the way human conversations work.
    Just your question along proves that.

  179. M Courtney says:

    Ox AO, I’ve read the works of Milton Friedman.
    I’ve also read other works on politics, like Marx.

    Seriously, “right-wing” requires acceptance of inequality. That is what the words mean.

    As a person who strives for equality, I won’t be right-wing. Although I concede that the argument for the inevitability of inequality is worth respecting.

    And I do not believe that left-wing or right-wing political views require or prevent authoritarianism.

  180. richardscourtney says:

    Ox AO:

    At February 19, 2014 at 3:37 pm you write

    richardscourtney says: “It seems you cannot desist from disrupting the thread from its subject.”

    You asked a question and I answered it. Not liking my answer doesn’t mean I was disrupting.

    Threads ALWAYS get diverted from topic. It is the way human conversations work.
    Just your question along proves that.

    I see. Your post says you were deliberately trolling to divert the thread from its subject.

    My “question” was to rhetorically respond to your rude and offensive post with the same conclusion as you put to me; i.e. “What is the point?”
    Your response was to cite the words of Joseph Goebbels as authoritative evidence of what you think to be truth. I DID like that reply because I thought it was hilariously funny!

    And, no, threads don’t “ALWAYS get diverted from topic”. They get diverted when trolls divert them because the trolls don’t like the subject of the thread to be considered.

    This thread is not about you, not about your unpleasant political views, and not about your ego. This thread is about Delingpole moving from the Telegraph to his new employer.

    Richard

  181. Ox AO says:

    said, ““right-wing” requires acceptance of inequality. ”

    That is the leftest version of they think is right wing or what they label us.
    But that isn’t who we are. Not in the slightest.

    Rich or poor it doesn’t matter we are all born equal.
    That is what we strive to create.

    Once they are born I have a strong feeling you will miss the concept of “more equal” from Animal farm. Which again isn’t right wing

    You read Milton Friedman maybe you missed something then? I don’t know?

  182. Ox AO says:

    richardscourtney says: “..you were deliberately trolling to divert the thread..”

    I am sorry, I tried to answer your question.
    I will refrain from doing that in the future.

  183. Box of Rocks says:

    Right wing politics accepts as inevitable (and sometimes as good) that social strata will always exist.
    The combination of the two concepts leads to a right-wing justification of authoritarian elites.

    ******
    Seriously, “right-wing” requires acceptance of inequality. That is what the words mean.

    *****

    The quotes above are pure bullsh*t.

    Ring wing politics believes that all men are created equally before the law.

    Left wing politics believes that some men are more equal than other, that they are above the law and their laws justify a means to its end. In the end for a leftist it is wealth for me and poverty for thee.

  184. Gail Combs says:

    _Jim says: @ February 19, 2014 at 9:42 am

    Does little good when the misinformation appears here; owed to someone who sees ‘corporatists’ and specific, planned, intentional mal-intent ‘perched’ and ready to spring from behind every rock (close to how the saying used to go …)
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    _Jim after several years of you inane factless sniping I can only conclude that I am hitting very close to the bone and someone is upset.

  185. Rastech says:

    M Courtney: “Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes describes the need for a strong central power to control the brutal impulses of the individual.”

    Hobbes was a supporter of the lawless State (the despotic tyranny and outrageous lie of “Divine Right”, where “The Law is what ‘we’ say it is”).

    To be fair, he published Leviathan in 1651, before the lie was categorically proven to be so by John Locke, who proved the truth of the Rule of Law (“If the Law makes the King, then the King is subject to the Law”).

    Unfortunately, psychopaths of whatever area of the spectrum, love the lawless State, and hate the Rule of Law. It’s really the same as the Satanist Aleister Crowley’s “Do what thou wilt be the whole of the Law”, and the attraction for psychopaths should be pretty obvious (as should the consequences).

    It doesn’t matter if it is a Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Mussolini, Hitler, a Military Junta, the Party, the Mob, the Technocrats, Napoleon Bonaparte, etc., or one of the three possible forms of Government (Democracy, Aristocracy, and Monarchy/Dictatorship), if power is available to be grabbed, it gets grabbed, nobody can be trusted with it, and you get the very worst of the worst rapidly floating to the top, and the outcomes are the same for everybody – worse than bad. Everywhere you look today, you see it in action, with Nations at different stages of the lethal cycle, and constantly proving how right John Locke was all those years ago, and you can compare the constant internal strife of Britain pre-1688. with the pretty much continual internal peace since (exceptions are largely down to criminal changes to the Law made on the quiet by enemies foreign and domestic).

    Outcomes are worse than bad because lawless States always inevitably fail, factions rotate and eliminate each other, collapse is usually catastrophic, and that collapse is usually accompanied by great bloodshed. Time and again around the World over millenia, this same insane blueprint has been followed, and each time the outcome is expected to be different, because the psychopaths think they are immortal, and that what will be, will be whatever they say it is. Then reality falls on their head, poisons their food, or protrudes up their toilet, ripping their guts out

    This is what life was like everywhere before John Locke enabled the creation of the balanced Republic (combining all three forms of Government together, to take advantage of their indispensable and unique strengths, and to avoid their fatally self-destructive flaws) which was long acknowledged as the ideal, but thought to be unachievable due to the inability to sweep power off the table, so the best hope for an insoluble situation was reluctantly considered to be a benevolent Dictator – hence Hobbes viewpoint – but unfortunately, the life span of even benevolent Dictators doesn’t seem to be any longer than the tyrannical ones, because power is there to be grabbed, and killing a Dictator to grab it has never been an obstacle.

    All around the World today we are again witnessing a return of the lawless State, and unfortunately, everybody here is likely to witness the unpleasant consequences. Forget the lessons of history, and we will assuredly be forced to re-learn them the hard way.

    The only thing that works is the Rule of Law, we will have to go back to it, and to do that, we have to ditch the stupid labels that camouflage what’s being done to us all, stop excluding each other with this left/right baloney, and accept that each and every one of us have our Rights, Liberties, and Freedoms, which everybody else deserves to have respected JUST LIKE YOU DO!.

    It’s a simple choice, the Rule of Law vs the lawless State.

    Choose wisely, there’s a hell of a price to pay for getting it wrong, and NOBODY, no matter their means, no matter their station in Society, is unaffected by a bad choice. The lawless State is literally like playing Russian Roulette with all chambers loaded, and somehow, we again have to empty all of the carefully crafted ammunition that has been placed in each chamber to be used against us.

  186. Zeke says:

    The rights of every citizen in our country are enumerated in the Bill of Rights. These rights include, but are not limited to, the freedom of conscience and the free exercise of religion, the freedom of speech, the right to keep and bear arms, the right to speedy, local trial with a jury of one’s peers, the right to peaceably assemble, the right not to be deprived of personal property, etc..Those rights not listed are retained to the states and to the people.

    This is what is referred to as equality – that is, equality before law. In pre-war Germany these rights were stripped systematically.

    Inequality of outcomes for efforts and labor is a separate matter and has nothing to do with inequality before law. That is why the term “right wing” as used in this context has turned out to be meaningless, and has taken up much of the thread through its use and defense by one person. Now we learn the term “right wing” refers to “inequality,” but this may refer to the fact that not all efforts or life choices obtain good results; failure and success are always a possibility in a truly free and open society. Self-motivation and hard work, along with genuine effort and energetic focus will bring better results than laziness, in a just and upright culture. Equality before the law does not remove risk from human endeavor.

  187. milodonharlani says:

    M Courtney says:
    February 19, 2014 at 2:04 pm

    Your European idea of what “Right Wing” means is not the same as American conservatism. Hayek said he was not a conservative because in Europe he wasn’t.

    In America, conservatism is the opposite of authoritarianism, which is a Left Wing affliction. Likewise in much of Latin America, as with Left Wing Argentine, Peruvian & Brazilian military regimes of the past & Venezuela & Bolivia now.

    US conservatives are libertarian, not authoritarian. Social & economic wings of the belief system differ as to the role of the state, but both agree on the primacy of individual liberty & responsibility under law.

    Meanwhile, back in the aftermath of World Wars I & II, as per my comment above re Poland & the Ukraine, even moderate Democrats concur on the present neo-Yalta:

    “Barack Obama and the foreign policy of this administration are responsible for this. It’s very simple,” veteran Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf told Steve Malzberg today. “He did not protect our relationship sufficiently with Ukraine and Poland, both the entries for the Russians, historically, into Europe. He sat back and he watched and he let the Russians do whatever they want.”

    Note that ex-KGB officer Putin is an authoritarian, as is Red Diaper Baby, Alinsky disciple, ex-community organizer, corrupt socialist Obama, who daily shows contempt for liberty & the rule of law.

  188. Ox AO says:

    What is funny or sad M Courtney well keep telling us what we believe.

  189. milodonharlani says:

    Ox AO says:
    February 19, 2014 at 4:58 pm

    Sounds authoritarian to me!

  190. Gail Combs says:

    M Courtney says: @ February 19, 2014 at 2:04 pm
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    That is why I describe myself as a civilize being and side step the left and right wing totalitarian fanatics. (It is also useful for driving _Jim crazy, my favorite past time.)

  191. markx says:

    DirkH says: February 19, 2014 at 6:03 am

    The Brits surely did “help to start the fire”.

    Dirk, that is pretty weird logic.

    It was more of a case of seeing violent character acting up and saying, “Gee, some one is going to have to do something about that one day … unless he stops doing that of his own accord..”

  192. Dudley Horscroft says:

    I had a look at reviews of “The Little Green Book of Eco-Fascism” by Mr Delingpole, and found this in the reviews:

    “There’s plenty to criticize about the environmental movement – for example, the author is correct in that wind turbines are dangerous to bats and birds. However, a balanced entry would have mentioned the benefits of wind turbines, and discussed ways of making them safer – for example, by tethering them like kites and flying them above bat flight levels. By placing turbines in the jet stream, they will also be more reliable as the jet stream is always blowing, unlike winds on land. You’re not going to find analysis on this level, but if you want to know how big Al Gore’s house is, or how many miles per year he flies to promote his fake global warming agenda, that’s in here.”

    Put up the wind turbines in the Jet Stream? Now there is a suggestion out of left field (I think that Yanks use this term to describe an idea which we would call “Off the planet”).

    But Richardscourtney keeps on whinging about people disrupting the thread. Perhaps he did not notice the title of Mr Delingpole’s book. “Eco-Fascism” is a part of Fascism. It should not really be necessary to go into the history, BUT…

    Socialism was supposedly about levelling society – Marx was hoping that by putting the control of everything in the hands of the all-knowing, all-wise State all would be levelled upwards. Unfortunately he was not good on logic – it created two classes, those in power and those without – see “The New Class” by Milovan Djilas for a description of this. Stalin was of the branch of the Socialism that believed in control of everything by the State, using forceful takeover (“theft”) to get it in the Party Hands. Mussolini was more practical and invented Fascism – the formation of Groups which would work together to control the people. The Russian term for these is Soviets, hence the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. We know them in the west as Trades Unions, Trades Associations, the TUC, AFL/CIO, Confederation of British Industry/Business, ACTU, etc. Hitler was in comparison a Johnny come lately who took a look at Soviet Russia, and Fascist Italy, and saw where they had gone wrong. The State did not need forcible expropriation of property to have control. It did not need supportive Soviets/Fasces to have control. All it needed was the force of law – and he would be the law. He well understood what Mao later said “Every Communist must grasp the truth, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” All Hitler needed was the threat of “do what I want or die”.

    You can argue as long as you like whether Hitler was right wing or left wing – it doesn’t matter, he was a socialist.

    Liberals should believe, as someone on this thread more or less put it : “We should all be equal under the law.” Note that people are NOT born equal. It would be difficult to find out of the 7 billion of us, any two persons who are totally equal. What is needed is equal opportunity. Liberals should strive for this – unfortunately it appears that the term has been perverted in the USA and it is now taken to mean ‘covert socialist’.

    James Delingpole throws light on the problems of a society where science is perverted in the name of progress, where so-called leaders say “Believe what we tell you or else”. That is Eco-fascism.

  193. phodges says:

    Back to Delingpole, I tip my hat to a man who points out the origins of the green movement in the corporate/governing elite: And by calling them both commies and fascists illustrates for what it is….a simple grab for power and control.

  194. Mr Lynn says:

    Richard S. Courtney is correct that this thread has been hopelessly diverted off-topic, but I have to admit the diversion has been interesting.

    More relevant, however is this from Bob B:

    February 19, 2014 at 5:50 am
    I think as long as the CAGW wacko’s keep trying to control the narrative and language calling us climate deniers, we should start calling them rightfully– “climate parasites” — because they siphon money from average taxpayers to promote their point of view:

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/02/climate_parasites_the_answer_to_climate_change_deniers.html

    ‘Climate Parasites’. I like it. An apt name for the fear-mongering Climate Alarmists and their army of Useful Idiots in the media and academia who promulgate a deliberate hoax to enrich themselves and deprive millions of cheap energy and prosperity.

    Let’s use it!

    /Mr Lynn

  195. Tanya Aardman says:
  196. Thanks, A. I changed the URL for my links to James Delingpole’s comment, columns and opinion to Breitbart London, at http://www.breitbart.com/Columnists/James-Delingpole

  197. Ox AO says:

    Mr Lynn and Bob B ‘Climate Parasites’

    We can call them what we want on this site. But never in history our side been able to control the narrative.

  198. Bart says:

    DirkH says:
    February 19, 2014 at 6:03 am

    “The Brits surely did “help to start the fire”.”

    Not exactly Molotov-Ribbentrop though, is it?

  199. M Courtney says:

    Interesting how the question of what words mean has come up repeatedly. “Climate Parasites” is a clever idea as it attacks the concept of state-funded science being impartial.

    On the political side-track: Left-wing and Right-wing do have specific meanings. They derive from the 1st Republic in Paris.
    Many here want to redfine what the words mean. Unsurprisingly no-one wants to redefine what the words mean in a way that is unflattering to themselves.
    More surprisingly, they also claim to have read Animal Farm.

    If your version of Left-wing or Right-wing politics is libertarian then I am glad. Authoritarianism is dangerous. Rastech’s comment at February 19, 2014 at 4:31 pm is a good place to start on that subject.
    But it is a fallacy to say that “my version of Left-wing or Right-wing politics is libertarian” therefore “all opposite versions of Right-wing or Left-wing politics must be authoritarian”.

    Left-wing and Right-wing are not the same as Libertarian and Authoritarian.

  200. Nick says:

    I’ve always wondered what these three blokes would look like in leather undies? :) Shame. Dissapointing :) LOL :)

  201. richardscourtney says:

    Ox AO:

    As part of your campaign to ensure this thread does not address its subject, at February 19, 2014 at 12:01 pm, you write

    @Bob B:

    climate deniers vs “climate parasites”

    They use Orwellian upside down tactics to win an arguments such as:
    Down is up and up is down.

    It is hard to imagine a more clear example of psychological projection than that!

    At February 19, 2014 at 2:27 pm you cited and quoted the words of Joseph Goebbels and asserted they are “correct”.

    And that was the best evidence you could provide to support your Orwellian claim that the politics you support – and as you claim are “correctly” explained by its greatest propagandist – is not right wing.

    Your offensive misrepresentations have disrupted this thread by using the very tactics perfected by your hero whose ideas you proclaim to be “correct”.

    Richard

  202. Vince Causey says:

    Gotta say, for a thread that’s gone OT, this is really interesting, so I’ll add my 2 cents worth.

    All the arguments about what “right wing” does or does not mean suggests to me that it is an amorphous term that means whatever the speaker wants it to mean.

    From the comments on this and many other threads and blogs a simple pattern emerges. To those who define themselves as socialist or “left” right wing it is associated with the BNP, fascism and Hitler. To those who call themselves free marketeers, right wing is libertarian – the antithesis of Hitler and Fascism.

    How can two groups have two completely different definitions of right wing? I don’t know, but one thing is clear. It is impossible to engage in debate if there is no accepted definition of what the term being debated means.

    M Courtney is correct though, that right wing derives from the first French republic and referred to where the groups were seated at the table. However, as not many people know that or if they did know it, probably don’t know what their ideologies were, the term is bound to be abused to serve rhetorical ends. .

  203. Ox AO says:

    Since royalists don’t exist and never will exist again the term ‘right-wing’ has no meaning yet the left gave us that label. go figure

    The way most of us view left and right wing today is very simply.
    Leftists are collectivists. right wing are individualists.
    Loosely put socialists and capitalists.

    said, “your version of Left-wing or Right-wing politics is libertarian”

    Leftest are not individualists and can not be considered libertarians.
    With the exception of maybe the contradictory term “Libertarian communists” which they call themselves Anarchist today. They are a confused group of people.

    All the other types of libertarians really hate each other. Their differences are based on how to handle the banking system. Personally I would rather call myself a classic liberal then a libertarian.

  204. richardscourtney says:

    Ox AO:

    As part of your campaign to ensure this thread remains deflected from its topic, at February 20, 2014 at 2:43 am you write this blatant falsehood.

    Since royalists don’t exist and never will exist again the term ‘right-wing’ has no meaning yet the left gave us that label. go figure

    I live in a Constitutional Monarchy in which the Crown has great power and the present monarch is rightly held in great respect.

    Please desist from your campaign.

    Richard

  205. richardscourtney says:

    Mods:

    More than two hours have passed since my post at February 20, 2014 at 1:10 am. I would be grateful if it could be rescued from moderation limbo.

    Richard

  206. richardscourtney says:

    Mods:

    Thankyou for finding my post at February 20, 2014 at 1:10 am which is here.

    Richard

  207. Box of Rocks says:

    Richardscourtney – if you like your monarchs you can keep your monarchs….

  208. richardscourtney says:

    Box of Rocks:

    re your post at February 20, 2014 at 6:05 am.

    By your standards that is a very poor effort at flaming and waving a Red Herring.

    I would be impressed if you were able to make a comment concerning the subject of this thread.

    Richard

  209. RichardLH says:

    Box of Rocks says:
    February 20, 2014 at 6:05 am

    “if you like your monarchs you can keep your monarchs….”

    As an alternative to Presidents? I think that a constitutional monarchy where the power is in the hands of someone who has only final veto powers and is under no election pressure is a truly excellent balance myself.

  210. Levi Bergen says:

    The public is deluged with CO2 sensitivity greenhouse gas alarmism. Steadily it loses ground.
    It is a rare man in media who has the courage to actually stand in the face of Academics who
    practice fraud and character assassination by way of normal everyday business.

    I know a man who was sent a snotty email by an AGW believer who threatened to contact his employer if he didn’t stop poking holes in his online stories.

  211. Box of Rocks says:

    Richardscourtney -

    What did you expect? “Welcome, sonny”? “Make yourself at home”? “Marry my daughter”? You’ve got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know… americans.

    kinda goes w/

    Monarchs? We don’t need no stinking monarchs.

  212. RichardLH says:

    Box of Rocks says:
    February 20, 2014 at 7:46 am

    “Monarchs? We don’t need no stinking monarchs.”

    Given the alternatives you have decided to elect, I’m sure you don’t.

  213. Mr Lynn says:

    Ox AO says:
    February 19, 2014 at 9:16 pm
    Mr Lynn and Bob B ‘Climate Parasites’

    We can call them what we want on this site. But never in history our side been able to control the narrative.

    Maybe, but the history of the Climate Alarmist movement is short, dating back at most to the 1970s, and really got going in the media after the steamy 1988 Congressional hearing with Jim Hansen. We may not be able to “control the narrative,” but we can change its direction. The media is fond of quoting Alarmists who denigrate “d*niers”; if those who are so labeled respond with “Parasites,” the media will have to take notice, and so will the public.

    Yes, I know that name-calling has nothing to do with Science, but the Climate Parasites are not really scientists, and the debate is over politics and ideology, not empirical reality.

    /Mr Lynn

  214. DirkH says:

    Bart says:
    February 19, 2014 at 10:30 pm
    “DirkH says:
    February 19, 2014 at 6:03 am
    “The Brits surely did “help to start the fire”.”
    Not exactly Molotov-Ribbentrop though, is it?”

    WW 2 started earlier.

  215. dbstealey says:

    IMHO, WWII started in 1918.

  216. RichardLH says:

    dbstealey says:
    February 20, 2014 at 8:52 am

    “IMHO, WWII started in 1918.”

    Well that well known authority on everything WikI has it thus….

    “Some academics[who?] examine World War II as the final portion of a wider European Civil War that began with the Franco-Prussian War on July 19, 1870.[citation needed] The proposed period would include many (but not all) of the major European regime changes to occur during the period, including those during the Spanish Civil War and Russian Civil War.”

  217. milodonharlani says:

    Vince Causey says:
    February 20, 2014 at 2:21 am

    The political terms Left & Right derive from the early revolutionary French National Constituent Assembly before the First Republic, ie before overthrow of the king, & refer not to seats at a table but where delegates of differing views stood or sat in the Versailles tennis court or subsequent meeting places. Excuse my nit-picking.

  218. Ox AO says:

    said, “I live in a Constitutional Monarchy”

    Yeah, what was her last ruling she made?
    If you believe that, no wonder you think I disrupted this thread by answering your question.

  219. RichardLH says:

    Ox AO says:
    February 20, 2014 at 10:07 am

    “Yeah, what was her last ruling she made?”

    The last time any act of parliament was made. A month ago as I remember.

    Royal Assent (no debate) | 30.01.2014

    or see Hansard for a more up to date ref.

  220. Ox AO says:

    Mr Lynn

    I agree with you.
    Thanks

  221. Ox AO says:

    richardscourtney says: Assume for a moment the definition of Joseph Goebbels and the term propaganda means to lie and not to influence.

    OK, assume the communists and Nazi’s are not similar Goebbels lied. Why where they even discussing terms of a merger? That was the narrative of the meeting. It failed very badly but that was what hundreds of Nazi’s and Communists were there for and why theirleadership made the meeting.

    Here is another example of very similar people with similar ideology that hate each other. Which are both on the other side of the fence of socialism:
    Ayn Rand talking about Milton freedman:

  222. Ox AO says:

    RichardLH says:

    Sense George V withheld his signature of the Royal Assent dealing with the Parliament Act 1911 no other Royalty has used this power because they couldn’t if they wanted to. Today it is meaningless.

    Thank you.

  223. RichardLH says:

    Ox AO says:
    February 20, 2014 at 11:00 am

    “Sense[sic] George V withheld his signature of the Royal Assent dealing with the Parliament Act 1911 no other Royalty has used this power because they couldn’t if they wanted to. Today it is meaningless.”

    You are wrong. If the monarch was to decide that an act was against the national interest – such as, say, extending a parliament beyond its legal term – then they could and would not sign it.

    It is the ultimate in check and balance.

    It is the ‘nuclear’ option but it is still there.

  224. Ox AO says:

    RichardLH Ok, assuming it still exists and it has never been used in over 100 years.
    Obviously not much control by the Monarchy part is it?

    The point is the right wing that supported a strong king that existed back at the time of Versailles tennis court when Louis XVI was around does exists today. The left wing exists in theory but not the right.

    The terms left-wing and the other side of the fence the right-wing have new meaning. Just the way it is.

  225. RichardLH says:

    Ox AO says:
    February 20, 2014 at 12:20 pm

    “RichardLH Ok, assuming it still exists and it has never been used in over 100 years.
    Obviously not much control by the Monarchy part is it? ”

    You miss the point. The final, ultimate power is in the hands of someone who, as you correctly observe. rarely/never actually uses it. But the point is that it is not in anyone else’s hands either. Therefore cannot be subject to abuse.

  226. richardscourtney says:

    Ox AO:

    This thread does not exist for you to promote, cite and quote Naz1 propaganda, and I am astonished that you think it does.

    Also, if you really want to know the immense power of the British monarch then read this and the subsequent discussion in the thread.

    Please note that it was because Edward VIII was was a Naz1 he was forced to abdicate before being Crowned because in 1936 it seemed that we may be about to go to war with H1tler. This was spun as being his desire to marry a divorced woman which – given the marital history of British monarchs – has to be one of the greatest pieces of political spin in the history of the world!

    I have now dismissed all the bollocks with which you have been polluting this thread so please desist from promoting your obscene political views and discuss the subject of this thread.

    Richard

  227. Ox AO says:

    said to me, “This thread does not exist for you to promote, cite and quote Naz1 propaganda”

    Wow! I could only laugh. I should never had answered your question.
    Sorry

  228. Back when Mark Steyn left the Telegraph I complained about it. The folks at the Telegraph sent me a very nice email saying they would like to have him back, but somehow it never happened.

    I’d like to see Dellingpole get something better than Breitbart. I don’t see a good quality of writing there when I do visit. The Telegraph is read by the whole political spectrum, but not Breitbart, which is only read by conservatives. The people who need to hear him most, won’t. Bad choice D-pole.

    Now this question: why did Mark Steyn leave the Telegraph? It wouldn’t surprise me if this if the exact same political and money thing happened to Steyn some years back.

    It’s the Telegraph’s loss any way you put it.

  229. milodonharlani says:

    Labels can generate more heat than light. There are different forms of socialism, just as there are of conservatism & capitalism. There is even for instance state capitalism, which is a form of socialism. Some of these terms have both economic & political connotations, obviously.

    However, the historical fact remains, uncomfortable as it may be for some democratic socialists, that NazIsm & Communism are forms of socialism. The bitterest wars are internecine.

    The key issue IMO, is who is sovereign, individuals or the state. Who is right, Locke or Hobbes? They cannot both be.

  230. Mr Lynn says:

    milodonharlani says:
    February 20, 2014 at 4:35 pm
    . . . The key issue IMO, is who is sovereign, individuals or the state. Who is right, Locke or Hobbes? They cannot both be.

    That’s right, and that’s the genius of the American Experiment: it’s based on the sovereignty of the individual. This principle is constantly under attack by tyrants of all stripes, whatever they call themselves. The greatest danger to the Experiment today is not from America’s enemies without, but from the Statists within, not the least of which are the Climate Parasites and their fanatical followers.

    /Mr Lynn

  231. Mr Lynn says:

    . . . And with that, you will note, we have brought the thread full circle, back to our celebration of the work of Mr. Delingpole and his constant defense of the Open Society and individual freedom against the mind-numbed Watermelons, Eco-Fascists, and Climate Parasites.

    /Mr Lynn

  232. milodonharlani says:

    Mr Lynn says:
    February 20, 2014 at 5:45 pm

    The CACA trough-feeders are an excrudescence of the monstrous 21st century state.

    American Experiment is apt. Well do I recall Lady Professor Dr. Margaret Gowing, historian of science at Oxford, who used to confound Marxist students by noting that Lenin’s “scientific socialism” was anything but, while among the Founders of the USA were actual scientists.

    One reason IMO why the American Republic succeeded & the first & all subsequent French Republics but the last (so far) failed was that the US revolution was led by men who already had succeeded in their chosen fields, & were imbued with the tradition of civic virtue. IOW, there was no Washington in France, not only willing but anxious to lay down power & return to his farm & distillery, so that unfortunate but blessed land ended up with the upstart opportunist Bonaparte instead.

  233. MarcusJuniusBrutus says:

    I am thinking of cancelling my telegraph subscription – the metropolitan elite seem to be writing almost everything at the moment – there is a distinct lack of balance creeping in. The remaining exceptions to that being Booker (on environment and family law), Evans-Pritchard (on financial stuff) and Tebbit (on politics). I’ll give it another month or 2 to see how the dust settles, but so far it’s not looking good.

  234. Colorado Wellington says:

    Ox AO says:
    February 20, 2014 at 2:13 pm

    Wow!

    I had a good reason to restrain myself from commenting on this thread once it took off in this very hostile direction—despite the importance of the subject and the unfair insults hurled.

    I was extremely busy and I did not want to enter the argument without being able to give it my full attention that I knew would be required. In May 2013 I made an offhand but factual comment about the start of WWII. I was nearly immediately smeared. I did not understand why, I tried to reason with the attacker—whom I otherwise deeply respect—but it did not go anywhere. If interested, you can read the history here:

    San Jose State University Meteorology decides burning books they don’t agree with is better than reading them

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/02/san-jose-state-university-meteorology-decides-burning-books-they-dont-agree-with-is-better-than-reading-them/#comment-1295293

    [a browser search for my handle will help you navigate through the remainder of the 338 responses]

    Warm regards,
    Colorado Wellington

    P.S. I share your focus on language and its controlling effect on our ability to think.

  235. Dudley Horscroft says:

    Ox AO says:
    February 20, 2014 at 2:43 am
    “Since royalists don’t exist and never will exist again …”

    This may well be the case in that benighted nation, the United States of America. However, in God’s own country, the Commonwealth of Australia, royalists – termed here “monarchists” – abound.

    Two items of evidence. In 1975, the elected government tried to govern without being able to pass into legislation the Budget – there was a majority in the Senate against passing the Budget. The Governor-General, the Queen’s representative and hence our Head of State, sacked the Prime Minister, installed the opposition leader as Prime Minister, the Budget was passed and elections were called. The actions of the Governor-General were vindicated by the landslide vote for the former opposition, now new government.

    In 1999, there was the culmination of several years of agitation for Australia to become a Republic. A Constitutional Convention was held, at which those for and against the change put their points of view. The Republicans eventually came to a form of Republic on which they thought they would win the vote at the subsequent Referendum (needed to change our Constitution). The Referendum was put to the vote – it lost in all States and the Northern Territory – only in the tiny Australian Capital Territory (equivalent to Washington DC) did the referendum pass. End – virtually – of all push for a change to a Republic.

    Left wing – right wing, yes, all references to the original meanings of the words have disappeared from common use, just as in the USA all references to Democrats, Republicans and Liberals have apparently lost their former meanings.

    “Climate Parasites” – I like it. One can only hope that Mr Delingpole will be able to use the term, and bring it into favour, in his new position.

    After thought – perhaps the USA ought to borrow from the Australian Constitution the power for a Governor-General (President, in its case) to call new elections for the House of Representatives and Senate when they will not agree to pass a Budget?

  236. Ox AO says:

    @Dudley Horscroft
    Thank you. I looked at the other thread. I better refrain from what I think what is taking place.

  237. Ox AO says:

    @Colorado Wellington
    I am sorry. last post meant to go too you.
    I honestly don’t know why these simple statements are getting inflamed into something they are not. Though I think it might be intentional.

  238. Ox AO says:

    @Dudley Horscroft
    In the US the media makes it a bigger issue then it really is when a budget isn’t passed. The way it works if something isn’t passed nothing new is started. Last time it took place I think it was over 85% of the government was deemed essential services which means they were in full operation without any changes. They shut down the parks so people have to write their congressmen to open the parks again.

    Personally i don’t want our politicians too ‘get along’ it means more money for idiotic projects like saving the planet from earths virus called humans, in other words ‘global warming.’ It means more watching what we type and read. Screw that.

    Question: about James Delingpole and Mark Steyn which were past tense part of the Main stream news. Are there any more conservatives or libertarians left in the main stream news other then John Stossel?

    Thank you

  239. richardscourtney says:

    Colorado Wellington:

    At February 20, 2014 at 6:30 pm you say

    I had a good reason to restrain myself from commenting on this thread once it took off in this very hostile direction

    It would have been helpful if you had joined me in objecting to the deflection of the thread from its subject onto promotion of Naz1 ideas and objectives.

    I was shocked when at February 19, 2014 at 2:27 pm in this thread here Ox AO quoted, cited and referenced Joseph Goebbels as a correct, accurate and authoritative source.

    WUWT has lost all credibility when H1tler’s Propaganda Minister is accepted as being an arbiter of truth.

    And Ox AO comes here doing that as a newcomer and not as an experienced contributor to WUWT threads. But he/she/it knew there are people – including you – who have a record of promoting such views on WUWT. so the blatant assertion of such ideas was certain to ensure that this thread would not get back on track.

    And when promotion of Naz1 views began to stall then Ox AO started an anti-monarchist Red Herring. Of course, you wanted to return to the other side-track which you have so often attempted on WUWT in the past, and you made your post I am answering.

    There are some attempts to start this thread discussing its subject; e.g. by MarcusJuniusBrutus at February 20, 2014 at 6:21 pm. Your support of the trolling by Ox AO hinders those attempts.

    Richard

  240. Ox AO says:

    richardscourtney said, “WUWT has lost all credibility when H1tler’s Propaganda Minister is accepted as being an arbiter of truth.”

    Do i really need to defend myself with this post? honestly?

    It was written by the NYT. Stating exactly what Goebbels said and yes i agree with what Goebbels said.

    That the Nazi’s and Communists were similar enough that the meeting they were having should merge the two parties together. Was it wrong for me to point out they had a meeting for the merger or wrong for me to quote Goebbels? I honestly don’t understand your disagreement.

    Goebbels said a lot of things that make sense to me such as, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”
    Does that make me bad? I don’t think so. by that is my opinion.

    I will be perfectly clear on this point. Joseph Goebbels was a very evil person which helped in the killing of millions of innocent people. I am glad he died a most gruesome death.

    Given my last statements honestly as i can and feel I am being unjustly accused.
    I would suspend your account here if I had any authority over this board for attacking a number of people (Another case: Colorado Wellington last post) here for no apparent reason.

    How many people have you scared off this site or was able to ban for you distorted vile attacks?

  241. richardscourtney says:

    Ox AO:

    In your flaming of me in your post at February 21, 2014 at 3:24 am you ask me

    How many people have you scared off this site or was able to ban for you distorted vile attacks?

    I answer: NONE because I have never made any “distorted vile attacks”.

    I wrote

    WUWT has lost all credibility when H1tler’s Propaganda Minister is accepted as being an arbiter of truth.

    That, of course, is simply true.

    In your post I am answering you wrote

    It was written by the NYT. Stating exactly what Goebbels said and yes i agree with what Goebbels said.

    Stop making your distorted vile attacks of WUWT.

    Strewth! Some anonymous trolls are despicable beyond belief!

    Richard

  242. Colorado Wellington says:

    richardscourtney says:
    February 21, 2014 at 2:16 am

    Colorado Wellington:

    It would have been helpful if you had joined me in objecting to the deflection of the thread from its subject onto promotion of Naz1 ideas and objectives.

    … there are people – including you – who have a record of promoting such views on WUWT.

    Of course, you wanted to return to the other side-track which you have so often attempted on WUWT in the past, and you made your post I am answering.

    Dear Richard:

    Even at first glance it is clear you’ve made some very serious statements and false accusations. My workload today doesn’t allow me to respond fully and immediately. It will be late in the day in our hemisphere, maybe even night, before I’ll have the time to reply. I hope you understand.

    I will be back, however, and ask you to defend what you have written.

    Respectfully,
    Colorado Wellington

  243. richardscourtney says:

    Colorado Wellington:

    re your post at February 21, 2014 at 6:56 am.

    Yes. You are right. I confused you with someone else and in my anger at what was happening in this thread I did not check the matter. As you rightly say, that is inexcusable..

    My statements and accusations which you quote are untrue of you and are misdirected.

    I have no excuse because none are possible.

    I offer my complete, unreserved and abject apology.

    Also, I ask the Moderators to add a note to my post at February 21, 2014 at 2:16 am which is http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/02/18/delingpoles-new-landing-pad-the-inside-scoop/#comment-1573168 which says I have withdrawn and apologised for my untrue allegations against you.

    I request this of the Mods. because otherwise some who read that post may miss this withdrawal and apology.

    I was wrong. My comments should not have been directed at you because they are NOT true of you. And I am sincerely sorry that I made this mistake.

    Richard

    [Thank you. Now, of the above paragraphs, which should be appended to the comment in question, or, should that entire comment be deleted? Mod]

  244. richardscourtney says:

    Mods.

    Please remove my retraction and apology to Colorado Wellington from moderation and post it as a matter of urgency. And I ask you to also make the addendum to my erroneous post so none will miss that I was wrong.

    Richard

  245. Ox AO says:

    richardscourtney says: “WUWT has lost all credibility when H1tler’s Propaganda Minister is accepted as being an arbiter of truth.”

    Agreeing with a statement from an individual doesn’t make the person virtuous.

    What is wrong with you Richard? really?
    This is looney

  246. richardscourtney says:

    Ox AO:

    At February 21, 2014 at 8:26 am your post says in total and asks me

    richardscourtney says:

    “WUWT has lost all credibility when H1tler’s Propaganda Minister is accepted as being an arbiter of truth.”

    Agreeing with a statement from an individual doesn’t make the person virtuous.

    What is wrong with you Richard? really?
    This is looney

    It most definitely is “looney” that you quoted, cited, and agreed a statement by H1tler’s Propaganda Minister as the only evidence you have to support a smear you made.

    If your agreement with that most infamous exponent of the Big Lie is not refuted then it can be cited as being evidence of the often asserted right-wing nature of WUWT.

    What is wrong with me is that I am enraged by your behaviour which is beneath contempt. Indeed, my anger at your behaviour is so great that I confused somebody with someone else and thus made an egregious error. I suppose you will be pleased at that, too.

    Richard

  247. richardscourtney says:

    Mods:

    Thankyou for the bringing my apology to view.

    You ask me

    [Thank you. Now, of the above paragraphs, which should be appended to the comment in question, or, should that entire comment be deleted? Mod]

    If you would be willing to do it then I think the appropriate thing would be to delete my post at February 21, 2014 at 2:16 am but leaving my name and the time stamp visible but adding an explanation that it was snipped at my request because it was mistaken and untrue. This would seem to be a reasonable public demonstration that Colorado Wellington was unfairly treated by me and that would seem to be the least he is entitled to.

    Richard

  248. Ox AO says:

    The premiss of the meeting between the Nazi’s and the communist to merge in itself was the evidence. It cannot be refuted that this meeting took place. Here is the link:

    http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F7081EFC39551B7A93CAAB178AD95F418285F9

    You can read what it says through other sources without paying the Nytimes to read it. There are books and documentaries made referring to that meeting.

    The statement made at the meeting by Goebbels was a logical statement to make for what was taking place. Very simple very straight forward there is no underlining mystery here.

    What is the issue? To be clear I don’t like the Nazi’s or the Communists.

    Honestly I believe you’re upset I brought put this Nytimes article about the meeting in the first place.
    Being a messenger of bad news often gets attacked I understand.
    The strongest evidence I believe the Communists and Nazi’s were both Marxist based is the founder of fascism Mussolini was a Marxists his whole life.

  249. Ox AO says:

    Can we get back to what this thread is about? Main Stream media sacking good people that have some part in these great parody like this one:

    and this one:

    I am not sure what Delingpole did to get him knocked out but Mark Steyn was attacked over those.

  250. Ox AO says:

    Here is another one i forgot about these video’s they are fantastic:

    Found them here:
    http://www.academia.org/mann-made-climate-changes/

  251. richardscourtney says:
    February 21, 2014 at 7:18 am

    Colorado Wellington:

    re your post at February 21, 2014 at 6:56 am.

    Yes. You are right. I confused you with someone else and in my anger at what was happening in this thread I did not check the matter. As you rightly say, that is inexcusable..

    My statements and accusations which you quote are untrue of you and are misdirected.

    I have no excuse because none are possible.

    I offer my complete, unreserved and abject apology.

    Richard:

    I accept your retraction and apology. While not privy to details, I understand that it was caused by a mistaken identity.

    I regret that I was not able to respond yesterday as I am sure it caused you some anguish while you waited for my reaction. I know that you aspire to be precise and fact-oriented in the discussions of climate science and its entanglement with politics. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind about your sincerity and the sense of embarrassment it has caused you.

    I consider the matter fully closed.

    Respectfully,
    Colorado Wellington

  252. Colorado Wellington says:

    Richard:

    I wanted my acceptance of your apology to stand alone for clarity.

    I deliberately did not include any more thoughts on the subject that led to the incident. That doesn’t mean I don’t have any. To the contrary, while very busy yesterday, thoughts and ideas kept popping up in my mind through the day and into the night. I consider them relevant not only in their relation to the Delingpole post and WUWT in general but also to the discussions that so frequently flare up in the comment sections.

    I would like to share them but I have a busy schedule through the weekend and I want to be very precise in my writing. I also doubt the practicality of including them in a thread that is now 4 days old. I am leaning toward revisiting the subject at a more suitable place in the future.

  253. richardscourtney says:

    Colorado Wellington:

    Thankyou for your generosity in your post at February 22, 2014 at 12:22 pm.

    Richard

Comments are closed.