We’ve seen Marc Morano from time to time on network news programs. Usually he’s being heckled by somebody brought on for “balance” like Joe Romm or some clueless professor named Watson from East Anglia. This time, nobody wanted to come on, and it wasn’t because of fear of debating Marc. “no pressure”
Watch:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Zeke the Sneak says:
October 5, 2010 at 8:12 am
Eliminating the way of life of thousands of English homeschooled families will not solve any problems England has with “hatred of Western values” within your immigrant populations. Abandoning English law and tradition which upholds family responsibility for children will not save you.
I am curious, what is your solution?
Benjamin P;
Were this video produced in isolation, you would be quite correct that it has garnered more coverage than it deserves. But is was not. This video is the culmination of a 20 year process of increasingly agressive tactics used by elements within the environmentalist movement to entrench their point of view without the need for scientific fact, reason, or logic. As such, it is a reminder of the lessons of history which bear eery similarity to atrocities of the past and foretell the future of the environmentalist movement should it be completely hijacked by its extremist elements and should the rest of us fail to divert them from the path history tells us they are on. Consider the evolvement of the debate over the years:
1. Ostracism of scientists with contrary views.
2. Abuse of the peer review process to suppress contrary science and funding of scientists with contrary views.
3. Manipulation of the peer review process to allow flawed science to be published as credible.
4. Bold statements declaring the science to be settled, an outright dismissal of any contrary evidence and a blatant attempt to quash any further debate or even the perception of the need for debate.
5. Labeling of those with skeptical views “denialists” in an attempt to not only discredit the evidence they present, but to associate them with an evil cadre of intensely bigoted fringe elements who deny the murder of millions in the Holocaust.
6. Calls by various people in the environmental movement to make skeptical views a criminal offence, studies suggesting skeptics are predisposed to disbelieve based on defects in their intelligence, upbringing, or genetic disposition. Calls for the captains of industry to be subjected to Nuremerg style trials for crimes against humanity.
7. The advancement of the “Precautionary Priniciple”, a philisophical argument predicated on the notion that the potential outcome is so disastrous that strong steps toward mitigation must be enacted despite any doubts raised regarding the science, and with no regard to the damage that the mitigation steps themselves would cause.
8. The Greenpeace editorial (later withdrawn) making veiled threats of violence toward skeptics and business leaders accompanied by not so veiled suggestions that “we know where you work, we know where you live”.
9. The 10:10 video (also now withdrawn) which on a pretense of humour and satire, depicts the murder of skeptics as nonchalantly as one exterminates vermin. By their own admission, they think the notion humurous, and cannot really understand the outcry they have caused.
As I said at the beginning, the 10:10 video in isolation is vile, in the historical context above it is the culmination of a process, which, if not derailed, ends in something horrific. That the envrinomentalists of 10:10 could not see the horror of their own creation is a consequence of the world in which they have immersed themselves. A world in which the critical science was suppressed, then dismissed, then associated with fringe elements of society regarded in general as evil, then painted as criminal, followed by veiled threats and finaly, overt threats.
The abandonment of fact and reason in this progression is readily apparent, the parallels in history striking, and the next steps frightening. There is no amount of coverage of this video that is too much, and the demand that they back down and return to a frank and honest scientific discussion is a moral obligation for the rest of us to make of them, for their good as well as our own.
>>It’s really interesting that you mention terrorism and hatred of
>>Western values on this thread, since this very video was produced
>>by environmentalist groups which are in fact generating educational
>>school programmes.
Eco-fanaticism has little in common with traditional Western values – it it totalitarian, overbearing, ideological, arrogant, aggressive and decidedly undemocratic. In fact, it is rather similar to the Muslim fanatics we often see in the West.
This is why the educational comment I made is pertinent to this thread, and why that brilliant spoof of this despicable video worked so well (but it has been deleted from YouTube by Spanner Films Ltd.)
P.S. It is rather funny that Spanner Films are desperate to protect the copyright on a film that has been withdrawn by its backers, and they will not even acknowledge making in the first place!!
.
The problem for companies that sponsor this sort of environmental nonsense is that these groups are practising a religion and not thinking about the consequences for their sponsors.
There are corporate risks to becoming known as one of the sponsors of an environmentalist movie that depicts the killing of children, and I imagine that a chill wind is blowing in the corporate halls of those sponsors.
I would say keep reminding people that Sony, O2, Kyocera and possibly even the UK government were involved in sponsoring this disgusting piece.
Recommendations:
1. Reject the Badman review of homeschooling in England as inaccurate and requiring disproportionate policy responses
2. “Acknowledge and celebrate the hard work of the many home educators in Britain who teach their children to an exceptionally high standard”
3. “Recognize the excellent value they represent to the Government”
4. Do not “conflate welfare concerns with educational issues in government statements on home education”
5. Do not give Local Authorities carte blanche to deny homeschoolers the right to educate their children
6. Recognize that recommendations in the Badman Report “undermine human rights and civil liberties, not only of home educators, but of all parents.”
Right of Reply: A Response to Graham Badman’s Report to the Secretary of State on the Review of Elective Home Education in England
Zeke the Sneak :
October 5, 2010 at 9:34 am
But, but, but,
Your list does not address the problem of ingrown communities in a collision course with the rest of the society that want to educate their children their own way, be they Christian Scientists or some cults or Islamic fundamentalists or ….
How can one have a multicultural society without a minimum of respect of law and custom and a minimum of common values?
In previous centuries it was the solution by the sword. Now we are sweeping it under the carpet until it raises its head in some extreme manifestation. Is bad housekeeping the solution of a multicultural society?
I believe it is correct to identify the education of the young for introducing tolerance and excluding intolerance. How one implements this is another question.
Ralph says:
This is why the educational comment I made is pertinent to this thread, and why that brilliant spoof of this despicable video worked so well (but it has been deleted from YouTube by Spanner Films Ltd.)
This one still works:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xf2nj5_10-10-no-pressure-radical-muslim-pa_fun
It appears, aside from some of the other awful ad campaigns by activist groups, this kind of thing is not new or unique among ‘mainstream’ entities.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/06/11/abc-tells-kids-save-the-planet-or-die/
The makers were actually pleased when the ‘game’ received more widespread attention, and like the 10:10 group hoped to ‘have a laugh along the way”:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/item_euZTHfClixIvXcBOGKbhTJ;jsessionid=51283CB2A70AA0D5ABF450B9567D1D90
The site appears to be dead now, though at least one school district continues to list it on their web page as a learning tool. It looks like another case where public exposure put the lid on an offensive attempt to bring children onside the AGW hysteria by scaring them silly.
Hi anna v,
I am here in the US and although the home education clauses were dropped from the Children Schools and Families Act on April 7th 2010, this debate in England is not going to cease as the gov’t will continue to be consulting on definitions of “full-time education” and “suitable and efficient education.”
Again, blind trust in the government to prevent “ingrown societies” or guarantee some kind of “multi-cultural society” or make sure children are not “disconnected from society” is misplaced, and are truly vague objectives. Protecting the rights of parents raise and educate their own children is a legitimate role for government; it is already enshrined by law and also reflected in Western tradition.
What I’d like to know is which city would benefit the most from Mr Morano as Mayor? Or heck state as senator?
New York City, Detroit, Los Angeles or the state of California?
It’s funny to me he seem to fit best in NYC but I think the most beneficial financially speaking would be to Detroit, Los Angeles (or California as a whole).
It’s always nice to have lots and lots of time on hand so one really can wonder about the greater issues in life . . . like troll bins for instance, have I ever visited such a interesting mysterious dark and shadowy, nooks and crannies laden, bin? If so, what was it like I wonder? o_O
Sweden and Germany provide examples of what other European countries are rightly trying to avoid:
“It is distressing that Sweden [referencing the state-sanctioned removal of 8-year-old Dominic Johansson from his parents more than a year ago] has begun to mimic the repressive actions of Germany, its neighbor to the south. Many German families have been forced to flee intense persecution in recent years and have settled in European countries such as Austria, France, Ireland, and the United Kingdom, where parents are free to choose the form of education that is best for their children. In a significant victory, the German Romeike family was granted political asylum in the United States in January 2010. The USA may well become a haven for Swedish families, too.
In June 2010, the Swedish parliament passed a new education package that makes homeschooling all but illegal, due to a new phrase that allows homeschooling only in “exceptional circumstances.” Even prior to the new law, though, homeschoolers had been forced to comply with increasingly intricate restrictions. When a family submits an application to homeschool, local authorities typically ignore circumstances and instead react in an extremely prejudiced manner, demanding that the children attend public school.”
Zeke the Sneak:
October 5, 2010 at 11:14 am
This is off topic but not irrelevant to this video, in the sense that it was aimed at children and those particular parents would consider it quite appropriate for their children, evidently from their response to the reaction of the “consensus” of those who viewed it.
In traditional societies the clan/extended family/village had the role of overlooking the raising of children. Children were not at the mercy of their immediate parents without an eye from the extended society.
In our fractured world, where the nuclear family has become the standard and grandparents and clan are a distant concept, the role of overseer has been taken by the government, and when it fails, it can fail spectacularly, as that case of the girl whose father had incarcerated her and had children with her.
The government and its agencies have taken the responsibilities of protecting children from abuse from parents, and for making sure their rights are respected. Part of those rights is their education, that the children have a right to be educated to the standard and level of the rest of their peers in the society they will exist as adults.
Children have rights, not only parents, so there should be rules governing home schooling that should be respected by all. One can discuss the content of the rules, but , in my opinion, the rules are a one way street if we do not want to find abused children, either as child labor or worse.
The video shocked me but didn’t surprise me at all. After a few years teaching in English High schools, one realises that the ‘Nanny State’ has actually become a close approxiamation to a police state in which citizens going about their lives are under surveillance to an extent undreamed of twenty years ago and the late unlamented NuLabour party cranked out a huge amount of pro-green and anti freedom-of-conscience legislation, pass laws, etc. The pressure to conform to ‘new norms’ in official circles is quite alarming and I fear the Brit Establishment is becoming the creature it defeated in 1945.
Interesting that some Brits are upset because this stroke was pulled by a bunch of half-witted fellow countrymen, with a nice, half-witted teacher from up north playing the lead role. There is definitely a difference between how a yank would view this and how a Brit would, no question about it. But it does give me a really warm feeling that these eco thugs have let slip their guard and revealed the true monster that lurks behind the AGW b+ll+cks.
For you unemployed skeptics out there, I am sure 10:10 will be hiring a few ‘token’ skeptics on their team immediately. It will give them great publicity about diversity and openness. You could probably negotiate some SWEET perks.
Laughing, John
anna v, in your third paragraph you make the point that the state is necessarily subsuming the role of grandparents or the local village in overseeing the “nuclear family.” This is quaint but not the case. Distant bureaucracies making more and more legislation and restrictions for parents, ultimately using the threat of incarceration, is not comparable in any way shape or form to the presence in the lives of their children of extended families.
Next you illustrate with two examples of abuse and imprisonment of children. This happens a lot: this is conflating welfare concerns with educational issues. There are plenty of laws and agencies which are responsible for responding to cases of abuse and neglect. Within the Badman Report, all four of the Serious Case Reviews were known to local agencies social workers, and police. As many as 9 agencies were involved in the case of one child who died.
This is arguing that all parents must give up their right to educate their children to government, because existing government and law enforcement cannot do their jobs in cases of criminal neglect. That is no way forward for England or any other country.
Children who receive a home education have parents who are greatly concerned with their development and want the best for them. Individual instruction and the flexiblity to persue the child’s personal interests are invaluable gifts these parents give, often sacrificing in other areas of their lives to do it. Outcomes are often excellent and not dependent on the education and training qualifications of the parents. Love, bonds and time together are the best classroom and teachers for the young developing mind. To attempt to remove this tradition from English society was rightfully and successfully resisted.
John Whitman says:
October 5, 2010 at 2:19 pm
“For you unemployed skeptics out there, I am sure 10:10 will be hiring a few ‘token’ skeptics on their team immediately. ”
You think they still have money?
———————–
DirkH,
OK, you got a point, I am going to insist the pay me a year’s salary in advance. : )
John
Stacking up for cold
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/10/stacking-up-for-cold.html
The LA Times is against Proposition 23. In that case, I’ll have to vote for it.
Well, Zeke, it is obvious we are not seeing eye to eye on this.
Something is criminal for a certain value of criminal, and some tradition is valuable for a certain value of valuable.
For example, I consider it criminal that gypsy children are not sent to school and are educated at home/tent/mobile home by parents who consider that learning how to beg and acquiring skills in snatching purses is a valuable traditional lesson. Criminal for the children themselves, because they are people who may add a lot of value to a multicultural society if the edges are smoothed off ( as many have).
Maybe you, living in the US, where assimilation or ghettos is the rule, have no idea of a multicultural society as an objective?
You do not want overseers for nice middle class families with educated parents, but, ( ignoring the fact that monsters can be highly educated as the video shows us) equal opportunity means that this will let off the part of society whose children desperately need this overseeing because their traditional culture with its checks and balances is either at conflict with their existing reality or completely absent anyway.
I hope that we disagree on the level of checks and balances needed within a society and the nuclear family, and not that such checks and balances should exist.
It should be obvious I am using the “state” in general terms as organized society outside the nuclear family.
Zeke [the Sneak] & anna,
I enjoyed your exchange.
Your topic of discussion is important. The relation of individuals (& families) to society.
I must wait though for another time to join in.
John
The ad was ill-considered and a huge gaffe. Anyone who thinks or suggests that the video is actually encouraging violence and murder, or thinks anyone who saw it would be so incited, is weak-minded and foolish and just looking for something easy to rant about.
This is just a straw man for those of you without a real scientific grasp on the issue can kick around to discredit climate change. Recess instead of doing yr homework. It’s a pity Franny gave to such an easy thread to pull at. The goal of 10:10, which is to have people really think about their energy consumption and be aware of it daily and try to reduce it in small ways, is a good one.
fah fah fah says:
October 6, 2010 at 7:35 am
The ad was ill-considered and a huge gaffe. Anyone who thinks or suggests that the video is actually encouraging violence and murder, or thinks anyone who saw it would be so incited, is weak-minded and foolish and just looking for something easy to rant about.
If this same material was posted by a student in the US, it would be taken seriously and reported to the authorities. This has become an unfortunate custom here since several famous school shootings. It was seen in hindsight that there were clear signals and warning signs that a violent act was being premeditated. If an environmentalist school outreach programme does it, you may brush it off as a gaffe, but a gaffe within a very important cultural and legal atmosphere. Now England has to decide how it will take violent threats. Are they idle gaffes when a student does it, or not? Is there a protected class of school activists who may enter the classroom and use violence against classmates to make a point?
anna v, hi.
I may be old fashioned, but I thought snatching purses was against the law.
We do not need to make new laws for that.
If you are talking about Muslim populations, England has a lot of issues to deal with first before it goes after innocent English citizens who wish to educate their children at home.
Is circumcising girls going to be legal? Do you want to make stricter immigration laws, or punish citizens and remove freedoms from them because the gov’t allowed in large foreign populations, against the will of those citizens? Are honor killings legal? Can Muslims live by Sharia Law, and have a Sharia court in England?
Start at the beginning with this!
As it stands in the West, parents are responsible for the upbringing of their own children. The eighteen years you have with a child go so quickly. Spend it with them!
“Gather ye rosebuds while ye may.”
John Whitman, jump in any time…(-: