My Inbox exploded with tips today, this one in particular. This unbelievably vile video from the 10:10 campaign takes the award for the most disgusting climate and carbon reduction video ever. It is in a class by itself, which is off the scale. See also Ryan Maue’s post below this one on the 350.org tie in for 10:10.
What were they thinking? They weren’t, because this is going to have the exact opposite effect they intended it to have. I don’t have words to describe my disgust with the video.
WARNING: GRAPHIC VIDEO IMAGERY
Here is what they say about it on YouTube:
The1010Campaign | September 30, 2010http://www.1010global.org/no-pressure
Whippersnapping climate campaign 10:10 teams up with legendary comic screenwriter Richard Curtis – you know, Blackadder, Four Weddings, Notting Hill, co-founded Comic Relief – and Age of Stupid director Franny Armstrong to proudly present their explosive new mini-movie “No Pressure”. The film stars X-Files’ Gillian Anderson, together with Spurs players past and present – including Peter Crouch, Ledley King and David Ginola – with music donated by Radiohead. Shot on 35mm by a 40-strong professional film crew led by director Dougal Wilson, “No Pressure” celebrates everybody who is actively tackling climate change… by blowing up those are aren’t.
I know people will be upset by this, please keep your comments civil – Anthony
=======================================================
RELATED STORIES:
Lower Than This They Cannot Stoop
Global Work Party Day on 10/10/2010: come up with your own event
UPDATE1:
Some people in comments whether this is some sort of horrible spoof. It appears to be direct from 10:10, as the URL highlighted in yellow below on the YouTube description links directly to the 10:10 promotional web page:
http://www.1010global.org/no-pressure
which is a subpage of their main website.
UPDATE2: They are so proud of this “mini-movie” they did a “behind the scenes” video of it.h/t to WUWT reader “scarlet pumpernickel”.
UPDATE3: Hot Topic (an AGW proponent site) in New Zealand thinks this video is “obviously effective“
I think I’ll idle my Hemi Charger a bit longer than usual from now on.
There have been so many complants, they have taken it off the website…..
I can’t believe they actually think this is good for their cause! As I watched, I was convinced that it was a parody sketch put out by the ‘skeptic’ side of the issue – they’re serious?
10:10.org has removed the video from their website, but are not taking legal action to remove it from YouTube. Yet. http://www.1010global.org/uk
Smokey says:
October 1, 2010 at 10:24 am
Their [unstated] complaint is that the public is beginning to understand that the AGW scare is a political and financial power grab, which cannot stand on its scientific merits – something that WUWT readers have known all along.
Well said, Sir!
Chris Ivey says:
October 1, 2010 at 12:12 pm
10:10.org has removed the video from their website, but are not taking legal action to remove it from YouTube. Yet. http://www.1010global.org/uk
———-
YouTube removes what they like. They are beyond control.
This scenario is very reminiscent of the Japanese movie called “Battle Royale,” in which school children were transported to an island, given all sorts of weapons, and pitted against each other to fight to death until only one was left. Each wore an exploding necklace and those that didn’t play along were terminated remotely. I was wondering when a similar scenario would appear somewhere prominent.
Without the celebration and glorification of death as promoted over the decades through horror films on through Lady Gaga’s meat dress people wouldn’t be so easily accepting of others’ deaths. I can also foresee the agenda going beyond “carbon footprint” once such a concept is widely accepted and enforced, so that all other resources necessary to life, such as water, are assigned a “footprint.” This, my fellow goyim, is the “sustainability” agenda.
I assume the movie puts ‘deniers’ with people who don’t know about the “dangers” of CO2, so they all die. Lots of thought went into making this movie.
{Snippitty Snip! Snip snipping snip. Snippp!] Right, that’s out of the way, and saved Anthony the effort of actually excising it.
A very disturbing video – the third or so that I stomached. I’m a Brit, and I see – whilst disagreeing with – the ‘It’s a British sense of humour’ defence.
Like many of the hundreds of comments I have read, I do wonder whether this is a stitch-up by those who do not think the Sun shines out of some part of the [politely, post-cranial] anatomy of St Algore.
Then I read that Call-me-Dave, described as a British Prime Minister, has endorsed the [apparent] source of this video.
If this is from the Algoreithm’s camp, it’s very very sad that they think this will help, and sadder stil that the man charged with sorting out the ‘Tony B.Liar’s and Brown’s Bills’ mess thinks it may be goodish. Hard to be sure, as Cameron comes across as an heir to Blair, with no discernible principle.
But – I’m nearer 70 than 40. I really do not know how the minds of kids today work on seeing this. I guess most of the posters here are over – what – thirty? And many in their forties or fifties, and – hat’s off – some sexagenarians or more, too. I am not sure that I would react as I did if I was a -reasonably intelligent – kid of seventeen.
Our children and grandchildren have been – mostly – brought up on computer games, some of which – Grand Theft Auto [2, 3 – and more?]is allegedly an example – are violent – but plainly fantasy. And CGI is pretty good these days.
I couldn’t finish this video – but it m i g h t get through as, apparently, intended, but to our teens. “Give me a child until he is seven . . . .” and all that.
[And that may all reflect on our own parenting skills as a cohort.]
Very disturbed by the video, and not much reassured by the many – doubtless heartfelt – comments.
Oh, sorry about the typos.
Here is a nicevideo from U-Tube – but, although it’s funny and endearing, it is pushing the advertising industry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmzgkMsf_GQ – it’s Harvey. You know – ‘Every home needs a Harvey’.
Patrick Davis,
I believe it was Minimata.
Well, I thought that the video was pathetic! If it was serious is was out of touch – failed!
If it was meant to be funny al la Blackadder – all I can say waas that he (the producer)has lost his way. BTW watched a Blackadder re run on TV last night – still magic.
Mic
Alex Buddery,
Thanks for mentioning the over-the-top nature of some of the comments on here. It has surprised me that very few have done so.
Greetings from Ireland. WOW so may comments today – a record maybe?? I enjoyed sending this to my friends who have gently chided me for years to being a climate change skeptic (they are civilized enough to not to call me a denier) – I dont think they are quite so comfortable now to be associated with genocidal fanatics !!! Ha ha !!
Look folks – the best thing you can all do is facebook/twitter/email the video to all your friends …
We dont need to debate it – its self explanatory
TomFP ,
I am giving it away. 🙂
Regarding the satire, I think that the satire in this video points both ways: the extremist rhetoric of both sides (quite a lot of it evident on this threat …) is the target.
As to whether it will work for my side, clearly not. I would not have expected such an over-the-top reaction to it by so many people, and I doubt the makers of it did, either. Maybe they should have done more research, and maybe I will have to, too.
SH,
Thank you for your comment. 🙂
David, when considering whether the reaction is “Over the top”, ask yourself what the reaction would have been if this were made by advocates of some right-wing cause. Say, sexual abstinence and anti-abortion; imagine the class being quizzed on whether they will abstain from sex, and whether they might consider an abortion. Then, the two youngsters who say they might are promptly executed by the teacher. What message is being sent by that video, and what would the reaction be from the Left? Would you defend that advocacy group on the basis of “they didn’t expect people to be so upset”?
I still haven’t heard from anybody defending it what the message of the executions is supposed to be, if “we” have interpreted it so wrongly, nor what precisely is being “satirised”. I’m not a stupid chap, I can do sums and everything, but I cannot discern any subtle satirical message in this, and I have really tried to, because I can’t quite believe my own eyes; I can’t quite believe anyone would have actually made this video. Nobody can be that tone deaf, can they?
What am I supposed to think when watching this? What is the message of the executions?
Ian B,
I have said a number of times what I believe this to be satirising. In the case of the abortion video, I would assume that it would be satirising the extremists on both sides, as in this case – I actually think that the abortion video would work in that regard. But, yes, there would likely be an over-the-top reaction to it. However, I would hope that people would not be comparing a fictional video to the holocaust, or accusing those who found it funny of wanting to kill them. No doubt my hope would prove fruitless ..
Loving the sweeping generalizations in these comments.
Anthony,
Thanks for replying to my posts, I feel somewhat honoured that you have taken the time. I do not have children and maybe that is why I am not so offended by this video or maybe its because I haven’t put myself on the line as much as you have and aren’t as close to the battle lines. I am 25 and it wasn’t so long ago that I can’t remember being a child of the age in that video and would have laughed at something like that. I can completely understand that some people are threatened by this video but I can’t change that I was not and still do not believe that 10:10 were trying to incite people to blow up children who don’t want to get involved with their cause. I have grown up with comedy which uses controversy to illustrate a point. I think this video has illustrated a very valid point and is now spreading that point throughout the world.
10:10 are subtly trying to be authoritarian in controlling people’s lifestyles. They say its a voluntary commitment but the way they talk about it is like their trying to institutionalise the whole thing. I think the video makes a good point that these people actually are trying to gain some sort power in getting people to do these things and that has been exposed. The whole concept of institutionalising voluntary lifestyle changes is contradictory. Why don’t they just make their tools available to people without having to provide details of themselves? It’s a slippery slope that they are starting on and I think that is what the video illustrates so well. It makes reasonable people realise that this is the wrong way to go about things.
That’s just my interpretation of it and although I support their right to do so, I think a lot of people went a little bit overboard on their reaction to people who weren’t disgusted by this video and didn’t feel threatened by it.
If you want to know what really offends me is the emotional blackmail in that video that shows the child being read a bedtime story.
REPLY: When I was 25, I probably would have laughed at it too. Give yourself a few years, get married, have children, build a life- the things that matter, and perhaps then you’ll look back on your view at 25, and say to yourself (like I have) “How stupid I was back then”. 😉 Peace, Anthony
kadaka, I understand that you did not mean to be funny, and I am overwhelmed at the compilation.
The comment was not directed at you, but at the fact that yes, some people do discuss these things as if they are rational.
As they did in the 30s and 40s, and are doing again, with balloons like this (and others) video.
What’s all the fuss about? It’s possibly an adequate demonstration of how desperate the alarmists are, but I really don’t see this as something to be disgusted about. Possibly there’s a difference between how a Septic (American :)) takes it and an Aussie?
For the record, I describe myself as an Heretic. Given that CAGW is a Religion, those who don’t believe it are such in the eyes of believers, are they not?
Cheers,
Tim
Youtube will not be able to pull it from here
http://eyetube.me/play/Politics/Agree_or_we_will_blow_you_up
“I have said a number of times what I believe this to be satirising. In the case of the abortion video, I would assume that it would be satirising the extremists on both sides, as in this case ”
I cannot think of the right word for this type of blind acceptance.
They are fanatics , David.
Why on Earth would they make an advocacy video in support of the cause that they fanatically support that lampoons their own position on the matter.
IF they have been duped by the producer, ( whose personal positions have yet tpo be revealed satisfactorily for a judgement), Then that would make them doubly fanatical for not noticing that they were being duped with an over-the-top video that makes them look evil.
You should take a second look David, old dogs can still learn .
Franny Batter herself says this about the video-
“Doing nothing about climate change is still a fairly common affliction, even in this day and age. What to do with those people, who are together threatening everybody’s existence on this planet? Clearly we don’t really think they should be blown up, that’s just a joke for the mini-movie, but maybe a little amputating would be a good place to start?”
I find it hard to interpret that in any other way than that the video is an expression of “who will rid us of these turbulent sceptics?” She says quite clearly “What to do with those people, who are together threatening everybody’s existence on this planet?”. That reads to me like, “okay, killing them would be going too far, but we can dream can’t we?”. And what can she mean by “a little amputating”?
There doesn’t seem to be any satirical intention. It just comes across as a w*nk fantasy. “If only we could do this”. Is the cold-blooded teacher meant to satirise Greens? Why would a devoted Green like Ms. Armstrong want to do that, when she baldly states that “these people [the reluctant children] are together threatening everybody’s existence on the planet”. That’s a profound statement of belief, and the whole explanatory statement by Armstrong does not suggest “satirising extremists” in any way. It suggests that the makers feel that the idea of literally destroying their enemies is a big giggle.