In light of these recent ugly FOI revelations uncovered by the Associated Press, it makes the recent FOIA issues paper by our friend Dr. Jennifer Marohasy and the subsequent scathing Washington Times editorial about science and disclosure (see below the Continue reading line) even more relevant. Clearly governments and government sponsored institutions like CRU don’t give a care about complying with the FOIA laws. CRU skated on a statute of limitations technicality. This WUWT story from the British ICO:
…the ICO has been alerted by the complainant and by information already in the public domain via the media, to a potential offence under section 77 of the Freedom of Information Act. The prima facie evidence from the published emails indicate an attempt to defeat disclosure by deleting information. It is hard to imagine more cogent prima facie evidence…In the event, the matter cannot be taken forward because of the statutory time limit.
And now we find not only did Homeland Security stonewall FOIA requests, they actively investigated the people making them:
===================================
Playing politics with public records requests
For at least a year, the Homeland Security Department detoured requests for federal records to senior political advisers for highly unusual scrutiny, probing for information about the requesters and delaying disclosures deemed too politically sensitive, according to nearly 1,000 pages of internal e-mails obtained by The Associated Press.
The department abandoned the practice after AP investigated. Inspectors from the department’s Office of Inspector General quietly conducted interviews last week to determine whether political advisers acted improperly.
…
Career employees were ordered to provide Secretary Janet Napolitano’s political staff with information about the people who asked for records — such as where they lived, whether they were private citizens or reporters — and about the organizations where they worked.
Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38350993/ns/politics-more_politics/
========================================================
Excerpts from
EDITORIAL: Global warming’s unscientific attitude
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
7:17 p.m., Wednesday, July 21, 2010
What separates a scientific claim from mere opinion is its ability to be tested by experiment. No true scientist objects to having his theories verified; the charlatan is the one with something to hide. Not surprisingly, purveyors of global warming have proved anything but open.
In the current issue of the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Law and Management, Australian researchers evaluated the community of so-called climate scientists and found them to be “antagonistic toward the disclosure of information.”
Professor John Abbot of Central Queensland University, a chemist and lawyer, and biologist Jennifer Marohasy studied the response of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (CRU) and the Met Office – Britain’s national weather service – to various information requests. The most noteworthy of these was United Kingdom resident David Holland’s demand for the raw data underlying the infamous “hockey stick” graph that was published in the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment reports. This chart was the centerpiece of the claim that the 20th century was the hottest in a thousand years. The stir that Mr. Holland’s request triggered among the scientists who worked on the report was captured in the Climategate e-mails
…
Mr. Abbot and Ms. Marohasy wrote:
“Of concern is evidence of a predisposition towards uncooperativeness on the part of the Met Office, which also used spurious claims of deleted correspondence and personal information in attempts to block the release of information,”
…
None of these simple requests should have been denied or delayed. Many of those involved in purported climate science seem more preoccupied with advancing a leftist, anti-business legislative agenda than respecting the integrity of the scientific method. It’s obvious why. Their cataclysmic scare stories are unable to withstand scrutiny. By deleting e-mails and using tricks to hide the inconvenient decline in global temperatures, the climate alarmists prove to be not men of science, but ordinary frauds.
===============================================
Here is the full paper,
(Environmental Law and Management, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp. 3-12, 2010)
– John Abbot, Jennifer Marohasy
h/t to poptech
===============================================
My two cents? Exercise your freedom of vote: Throw the bums out in November.
” Steinar Midtskogen says:
July 23, 2010 at 4:29 am
Thomas says:
July 23, 2010 at 1:58 am
‘ I think there is something to be learned from the swiss example. They seem to be doing quite well, so something might be in it. ?’
Too much such direct democracy, and what you’ll get are inconsistent decisions and politicians that have no freedom to their jobs properly.”
You must have a good example of Swiss inconsistency that you can share with us, or do you not? Like deciding to end nuclear, and then deciding not to do so? No, that was Sweden, another country.
REPLY: Saying then “don’t bother to vote”? – Anthony
I understand your point Anthony but…Is it not fair to say politicians only stay in power by sucking up to the beliefs of the people. As we have seen, the AGW religion has taken a huge bashing in the last year and various polls show its the least of voters worries! Whilst saying that, I sincerely hope the good people of the USA not only cane the idiotic left but actually tell them to their faces before the voting begins!
At least the U.S. has not had over a decade of idiotic politics that the U.K. has had! It will take many years there to repair the damage and the current lot………have not even got the balls to begin, hence the allowed white washes we have seen!
Come on the Republics, show some balls (I discount California from that but then again……”I’ll be back”..Phhtttt!! )
bradley13 says:
July 22, 2010 at 6:40 pm
Yes, but in retrospect the system worked reasonably well for many decades. One can debate when the US government started to get too powerful. Those familiar with Southern history will point to the Civil War (States have the right to secede – the justification for denying this was contrived). Others will say the the real turning point came during the Great Depression (the first massive use of federal programs to intervene in individual lives), other will point to the “Great Society” programs.
And still others, myself included, say it began with the Railroad act of 1877, I believe was the date. It greatly expanded the Federal powers to regulate interstate commerce, which is tied to almost all the laws made since that abgrogate states rights.
Just The Facts says:
July 22, 2010 at 11:14 pm (Edit)
We might need to establish a third party in order to remove the current political sclerosis.
tallbloke says:
July 23, 2010 at 12:08 am
Be careful what you wish for. We now have a hung parliament in th UK with no overall majority for one party. This leads to paralysis too.
For a thought experiment, Tallbloke, consider repealing all bills passed by Congress since November 22, 1963. What would the country be like now. Paralysis is a good thing. Statistics indicate that the stock market trends down whenever Congress is in session.
Ref – mcates says:
July 22, 2010 at 4:51 pm
“Personally, I don’t think there is any debating that the system is broken.”
_______________________________
No! Ain’t the ‘system’ mate. It’s the electorate. Most of us are so ‘civilized’ we don’t recognize danger when it’s eating our leg off; and if we did, wouldn’t know what to do to stop it. Q -What’s the difference between ‘The Greatest Generation’ (as some fool tv reporter once called them) and today’s? A- Education!
The “Greatests” came up the hard way and fought damn hard to achieve the results they did. The “Todays” have been spoon fed all their life and couldn’t fight their way out of a rotten, soggy, wet paper bag (with big holes in it). Y’hep.. it’s all about Education (and I’m not talking about the worthless primary version kids have been getting in (quote) ‘schools'(unquote) the past 40 years).
That’s the truth! It’s pathetic, but it’s the truth. There’s no way to sweeten it up. People create their own ‘system’ every minute of every day, what we have is what we built. We The People… is the “system”!
You can see now why there was such and eager rush to get everything “done and dusted” binding agreements signed and political alignments consolidated at Copenhagen.
I credit the blogosphere with doing the work that the Main Stream Media (AKA Missingpoint Stupid Media) should have been doing. Alerting the world to the true agenda of the UN, the changing reasons for filling their coffers and gaining political power at the expense rather than in aid of the politically distressed of the world, and particularly in marshaling the concerns and voices of sceptics that had been very badly treated as individuals by a “science” elite that dominated their governments, and feather bedded in some universities, and environmental leftist groups hell bent on destroying democratic rights and lifestyles along with a loony component that endorsed eugenic style solutions, economic chaos. Not to mention the anarchists waiting in the wings along with the mandatory socialists all hoping to re-establish their own political and social agenda in the chaos that would inevitable happen, and the unbelievable but also understandable well funded financiers who stood to profit whichever way the climate cookie crumbled.
We who had no real funds, just doubts, voiced our concerns as that rush developed to the crescendo of Copenhagen.
We didn’t realise that the arrogance of a few Climate Scientists and their fellow travellers, their spiteful and underhand name calling, their denigration of well respected but dissenting scientists, all manifested themselves in the Climategate exposures, the frustration of seeing reasonable requests sidelined all helped by reinforcing resolve of those, that sought truth, to force by FOI, and then expose the deceitful activities by release of the CRU emails, ignited us all and Copenhagen failed for all its many reasons.
Then we have had the frustration of seeing the unbelievable in the whitewash activities, the lies and ignorance again of the arrogant, the same ideological scientific elite, try to re-instate their arrogance and authority, in denial of voices like that of Judith Curry and others of like mind that sought to re-position and reform by strictly observing scientific standards.
Then attempts to re build the worst aspects of climategate practices and continue with blacklists and denigration to punish dissent and in the political sphere to coverup, bully, run secret agenda, rule by regulation and stealth, with inevitable loss of freedom and lose the very essence of democracy.
In my view it is hardly surprising that the frustration at those activities will now motivate those influenced by such things to exercise their disaproval of these shenanigans in the one way we have at our disposal – our right to vote!
Jennifer Maharosy I appreciate so much the slings, arrows and cheap potshots you took on our behalf in Australia, and now in this published and peer reviewed paper (that the Norwegian rat finds hard to digest!!), may this scholarly work eventually penetrate the closed minds of those who work against us all. It is also an excellent reference for those that will follow determined to get to the truth.
It is also interesting that President Obama is also following closely our upcoming election, the shunting of the carbon tax, the concern to overcome the groundswell of disbelief in the political Climate Change hysteria – and playing a large part in the calling of an early election here.
So by all means exercise your vote with care and consideration of the value and integrity of our democracies.
Moderators, looks like my last comment got sidelined by the site auto dump – please reinstate if content meets moderation standards.
JimB says:
July 22, 2010 at 6:22 pm
The system needs a complete overhaul, possibly the establishment of a permanent competitive third party”
_______________________________
We may be beyond that.
It might be time for a benevolent dictator. I’m surrounded by people who believe these idiots mean no harm, and are basically innocent of any wrong doing. Some don’t even believe they’re all that dumb.
Of course the latest Gallup Poll puts approval of congress at %11, so that, at least, gives hope 🙂
JimB
________________________________________________________
Print out this essay and give it to those who do not understand.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
http://www.barefootsworld.net/545people.html
BUT NO DICTATOR!!!
“The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes.” — Thomas Paine
Currently we can still vote the idiots out. With a dictator it take a gun, a bomb, poison or madame guillotine to get them out of office so no thanks voting is a lot less messy.
At least with the present mess we can:
1.Send this essay to everyone in your address book, and hope they do something about it.
2. Agree to vote against everyone that is currently in office, knowing that the process will take several years.
3. Decide to run for office yourself and agree to do the job properly.
4. Lastly, we can sit back and do nothing, or re-elect the current bunch.
We got ourselves into the mess and it is up to us to get ourselves out of the mess.
The Total Idiot, 899,
Here is more:
“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution;”. – ART. 6 U.S. CONST.
Article 6 above, is called the SUPREMACY CLAUSE, and it clearly states that, under every circumstance, the above listed officials in these United States must hold this documents tenets supreme over any other laws, regulations, or orders. Every U.S. Police officer knows that they have sworn a oath to the people of our nation that we will not only protect their lives and property, but, that we will uphold, and protect their freedoms and rights under the Supreme laws of this nation, – the U. S. Constitution.
In this regard then, we must agree that those within government that restrict a Citizens rights, (such as restricting the peoples right to travel,) are acting in violation of his or her oath of office and are actually committing a crime against such Citizens.
THE CLAlM AND EXERCISE OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RlGHT CANNOT BE CONVERTED INTO A CRIME.” – Miller v U.S., 230 F 2d 486. 489.
READ this article, it is a real eye opener and something everyone should keep in the glove box of their vehicle. http://www.realtruth.biz/right_to_drive.htm
Not quite ‘off topic.’ Several comments mention that voting for the Tea Party candidate in the absence of a preferred-for-a-reason candidate (independent of party) is the right action. Based on developments in the Florida (Congressional 8th) race involving the demonstrably disturbed Alan Grayson, this may not be the best automatic default. It has been alleged that Grayson has established and funded a “Tea Party” candidate with no chance of winning, but who could take votes by people who vote the “Tea Party” without knowing for whom they are voting.
BOTTOM LINE: Vote! BUT vote intelligently!!
#
#
Rattus Norvegicus says:
July 22, 2010 at 7:35 pm
Would it have been better if I had used an acronym? You could have just snipped the banned word instead of the whole post.
_____________________
So rewrite the post in language acceptable in polite company just like the rest of us do.
Old PI says:
July 22, 2010 at 9:40 pm
Things got away from us when we stopped hanging horse thieves. The Congress is the biggest bunch of horse thieves this nation has ever seen…. Swinging from a half-inch hemp rope is suitable, in my opinion. There is no recidivism following a necktie party. We have a person sitting in Congress today that was impeached as a judge for bribery. Unbelievable!
______________________________________________
I have always been fond of madame guillotine, some people have survived a necktie party.
stephen richards says:
July 23, 2010 at 1:03 am
The view from this side of the river is that Obama was ‘lent’ huge sums of money and McCain wasn’t. However, neither candidate looked like they were going to be much use either. So, what do you do? Two idiot candidates, one with lots of rich backers and the other so stupid that no-one wanted to back him.
_____________________________________________________________-
I voted third party. I refuse NOT to vote and I could not stomach either of those Manchurian Candidates.
Thomas says:
July 23, 2010 at 1:58 am
…..I think there is something to be learned from the Swiss example. They seem to be doing quite well, so something might be in it.
__________________________________________________________
There is another thing to learn from the Swiss.
It used to be and hopefully still is a requirement that ALL males between the ages of 18 and 65 or in the Army reserves. A corollary is ALL household have weapons with a trained military person residing inside. This helps keep the crime rate down and the politicians relatively honest. Between that and the nasty terrain Germany decided to bypassed the Swiss in WWII
That lesson is one of the reasons the “progressives” keep trying to figure out how to get around the 2nd and why the Founding Fathers put it in in the first place. A people with teeth are a lot harder to subject to tyranny.
The other lesson is that old fashioned military training generally administers a large dose of reality to Mommy’s Baby Boy. I have spent years in a university environment and also as an officer’s wife. Academics would not know reality if it bit them on the rear. The noncoms, enlisted and officers I hung around with were well grounded in reality.
noaaprogrammer says:
July 22, 2010 at 10:14 pm
‘What’s the opposite of “progress”?’
________________________________________________________
Billy Liar says:
July 23, 2010 at 2:25 am
Regress?
________________________________________________________
I always thought it was Egress.
As in P.T. Barnum’s
“This way to the Egress”
http://www.ptbarnum.org/egress.html
Gail Combs: July 23, 2010 at 11:03 am
It used to be and hopefully still is a requirement that ALL males between the ages of 18 and 65 or in the Army reserves. A corollary is ALL household have weapons with a trained military person residing inside.
To be more precise, every Swiss male between the ages of 18 and 40 who are not members of the active military forces must be members of the Army reserve, unless exempted by reason of physical disability or mental incapacity — membership between ages 40 and 65 is optional. Not only must every household contain weapons, but they are select-fire weapons (assault rifles, to the uninitiated). They must be readily accessible to all adult members of the family, and there must be a minimum of 200 rounds stored with them.
Most of the Swiss keep their weapons and ammo in a pantry near the kitchen — and the door *isn’t* locked.
Pete Hayes says:
July 23, 2010 at 7:19 am
….. Whilst saying that, I sincerely hope the good people of the USA not only cane the idiotic left but actually tell them to their faces before the voting begins! ….
_________________________________________________________________________
I called up the office of one of my Congressmen running for re-election to ask where he stands on several issues. I ended up leaving the gentleman who answered stuttering. After listening to a few minutes of the mealy mouth platitudes, I could not resist letting him have it with both barrels even though I do not have Lord Monckton’s eloquence.
Gail Combs: July 23, 2010 at 10:38 am
Old PI says:
July 22, 2010 at 9:40 pm
Swinging from a half-inch hemp rope is suitable, in my opinion. There is no recidivism following a necktie party.
______________________________________________
I have always been fond of madame guillotine, some people have survived a necktie party.
Well, sure, if you only use half-inch…
Gail Combs says:
July 23, 2010 at 11:24 am
noaaprogrammer says:
July 22, 2010 at 10:14 pm
‘What’s the opposite of “progress”?’
________________________________________________________
Billy Liar says:
July 23, 2010 at 2:25 am
Regress?
________________________________________________________
I always thought it was Egress.
As in P.T. Barnum’s
“This way to the Egress”
———————————-
The opposite of PROgress is CONgress!
@Ken hall:
“If only the massed population could wake up to that and everyone boycott the democrats AND the republicans.”
you have the intrinsic problem of people not wanting to waste their vote on a candidate that can’t win. If enough people decide to take a chance, then they COULD win of course, but few are convinced that it can happen. So instead, people vote for the lesser evil… the party (of the 2 majors) that are closest to what they want.
Call me an optimist, but it’s POSSIBLE that with the supreme court decision that allows corporations and other groups to spend what they like on elections, the corporations may feel that 3rd party candidates may not be a total waste of time and channel resources toward them if they support positions that the company feels is in their, and the country’s, interests. If the electorate sees support behind a candidate, they may be willing to give them a shot.
So, it MAY be possible that multi-party elections will make a comeback if the message of the candidates is sufficient to draw both corporate and popular support, at least in niche areas.
noaaprogrammer says:
July 22, 2010 at 10:14 pm
‘What’s the opposite of “progress”?’
________________________________________________________
Billy Liar says:
July 23, 2010 at 2:25 am
Regress?
________________________________________________________
I always thought it was Egress.
As in P.T. Barnum’s
————–
the opposite of progress is the opposition to progress – by which one is now known as a progressive. interesting how these progressives long for the day of pure feudalism and to the genocidal extremes they are willing to go.
It’s interesting that the star trek saga has the era of global war & disaster and breakdown of society due to the eugenics wars. (Wrath of Khan related episodes/movies has the first references to it, First Contact has the last). It’s downright scary how far towards this we’ve come compared with the perceptions of plausible futures we had back in those days. And, as throughout the 20th century, it’s the progressives leading the way to what is likely the worst of all future scenarios under the control of man.
From: Gail Combs on July 23, 2010 at 10:38 am
What, don’t they use and follow the traditional wording of such pronouncements?
“…they shall be hung from the neck until dead.”
Don’t see a time limit for the procedure there. In ye olden days that could take a while, and they would let it take a while.
However the guillotine does have a distinct advantage. It quickly prepares a body for immediate organ donation without the deterioration in quality of transplantable parts often found with regular trauma victims…