'…we need a conspiracy to save humanity'

Dear Mods,
My very recently submitted comment did not immediately show as awaiting moderation like usual.
Can you look for it in the WordPress nether regions? Thanks.
John
[Rescued & posted. — mod.]

Liberal politics and liberal media. Socialist democrat politics and socialist democrat media, working hand in hand to provide only the news and facts that fit their agenda. Environmental politics and environmental media, the same one sided fraud sharing the same resources.
This is the ugly, ‘do anything to win’ collaboration we stand against. The personal and professional assaults are directed at us in veiled and treacherous fashion as our opposition sees themselves as ‘saviours of the planet’, justified in using every feint and fraud necessary to achieve their god or gaian blessed mission.
Their bigoted hate speech reflects their own dark and self-abandoned souls.
How do we refute their viciousness? Look them unwaveringly in the eye. Speak directly to fact and truth, always with a boy scouts face. And keep a clenched fist under the hat in your hand, for that moment when their attacks transition from verbal to physical assault. ‘Be prepared.’
MtK

At 10:31 AM on 16 September, Joe Postma had written:

So they didn’t like the “SS” acronym for their propagandist little blog site?
Well, let me tell you about the only thing that comes to my mind when I see the acronym “SkS”:

“The SKS is a Soviet semi-automatic rifle chambered for the 7.62x39mm round, designed in 1943 by Sergei Gavrilovich Simonov. Its complete designation, SKS-45, is an acronym for Samozaryadnyj Karabin sistemy Simonova, 1945 (Russian: Самозарядный карабин системы Симонова, 1945; Self-loading Carbine of (the) Simonov system, 1945), or SKS 45. In the early 1950′s, the Soviets took the SKS carbine out of front-line service and replaced it with the AK-47; however, the SKS remained in second-line service for decades. It is still used as a ceremonial arm today. The SKS was widely exported, and was also produced by some former Eastern Bloc nations as well as China, where it was designated the “Type 56″, East Germany as the Karabiner S and in North Korea as the “Type 63″. The SKS is currently popular on the civilian surplus market in many countries, including the United States. It was one of the first weapons chambered for the 7.62x39mm M43 round, which was also used later in the AK-47.”

There are so many of these things in Canada, the US, and elsewhere, used by red-blooded civilians for target practice and good ol’ right-wing/libertarian/rational leftist/2nd Amendment fun…it would be too funny to see the shock & horror on their faces when they google “SKS” and get page after page of gun info.
The acronym for their pseudoscience site reminds most people of guns.

Ah, so I’m not the only RTKBA advocate to have observed this happy happenstance.
Have any other frequenters of these fora given much consideration to the fact that those of us who approach social, economic, and political matters from the methodologically individualist (i.e., unalienable individual human rights) perspective tend not only to be skeptics anent the preposterous “man-made catastrophic climate change” boojum but also merry and enthusiastic hoplophiles?

“The right to own weapons is the right to be free“

Anthony, you are the gentleman of gentlemen. But holding on to this one is pulling your punches too much. Get this kind of stuff out early and often to give us the argument we need to convince our friends and family who they are.

@ursus
Yes…yes that IS the calibre of the AGW advocates and this is why they’ve always been failing. The only thing that has ever kept them going is oodles and oodles of billions of dollars of propaganda funding. And their obvious & sheer lack of rationality…

Mooloo says:
September 16, 2012 at 3:59 pm

…
I note that some of the commenters above don’t seem to realise that fighting their abuse with more abuse is a losing strategy. We need to stay classier than them.

“Some of us” aren’t abusing the Warmistas at all–their whole vile approach borders on criminal behavior (if not actual criminal behavior). Our counter to them is in the form of a defensive promise so they’d better wake up to reality.

Has anyone tried to post these quotes over there?

“my personal contribution will be to ripe Anthony Watts’ throat out – metaphorically of course.”
Can’t figure out if this poster is “metaphorically, [ of course ] gay and expressing a desire to tongue kiss Mr Watts.

I am sure that even if there is no admin forum, emails go between contributors of WUWT. And indeed, between contributors of WUWT and other people. And I am quite sure that on occasion these will involve comments which would not be posted in public and which those concerned would prefer to remain private, as was intended.
Anthony – are you happy for every single one of all your personal and private correspondences with other people to be made public?
Or are you a hypocrit?
REPLY: I started an Internet service for my TV station in 1996, and my email address goes all they to then, and rule#1 from the newsroom was “treat your emails as if they might one day be published in the newspaper”. So should that happen one day, I’m not too worried about it. After looking at the articles you’ve written, I realize now you are just another Chemtrails and Atlantis nut, so bugger off.
http://www.helium.com/users/444198/show_articles
-Anthony

At 9:00 AM on 17 September, timg56 had mentioned:

Many have already noted Glenn Tamblyn’s poor understanding of the Vietnam War. I would like to add that I consider the entire concept of comparing the debate about climate change to a war is interesting, and not in a healthy way.
First I would like to direct readers attention to a letter to the editor by a young Naval officer [Lieutenant (Junior Grade) Charlie Hymen, U.S. Navy] in last month’s USNI Proceedings

…wherein this O-2 had focused upon – apparently without realizing it – the concept known as “the moral equivalent of war,” which had first been promulgated by psychologist and pragmatist philosopher Dr. William James in 1906.
Dr. James is widely acknowledged to have been a key influence on the sociopolitical “progressive” movement in these United States. In that 1906 speech of his (later published as an essay) the long-winded cuss said:

If now — and this is my idea — there were, instead of military conscription, a conscription of the whole youthful population to form for a certain number of years a part of the army enlisted against Nature, the injustice would tend to be evened out, and numerous other goods to the commonwealth would remain blind as the luxurious classes now are blind, to man’s relations to the globe he lives on, and to the permanently sour and hard foundations of his higher life. To coal and iron mines, to freight trains, to fishing fleets in December, to dishwashing, clotheswashing, and windowwashing, to road-building and tunnel-making, to foundries and stoke-holes, and to the frames of skyscrapers, would our gilded youths be drafted off, according to their choice, to get the childishness knocked out of them, and to come back into society with healthier sympathies and soberer ideas. They would have paid their blood-tax, done their own part in the immemorial human warfare against nature; they would tread the earth more proudly, the women would value them more highly, they would be better fathers and teachers of the following generation.
Such a conscription, with the state of public opinion that would have required it, and the many moral fruits it would bear, would preserve in the midst of a pacific civilization the manly virtues which the military party is so afraid of seeing disappear in peace. We should get toughness without callousness, authority with as little criminal cruelty as possible, and painful work done cheerily because the duty is temporary, and threatens not, as now, to degrade the whole remainder of one’s life. I spoke of the “moral equivalent” of war. So far, war has been the only force that can discipline a whole community, and until and equivalent discipline is organized, I believe that war must have its way. But I have no serious doubt that the ordinary prides and shames of social man, once developed to a certain intensity, are capable of organizing such a moral equivalent as I have sketched, or some other just as effective for preserving manliness of type. It is but a question of time, of skilful propogandism, and of opinion-making men seizing historic opportunities.

Sounds like current “Liberal” fascist compulsory “community service” crapola, don’t it?
What the political progressives (who perverted the term “Liberal” to deceitfully re-brand themselves in the decades following World War One) had noted in democratic societies since the French Revolution instantiated the concept of “a nation in arms” with the key components of mass armies enlisted and ordered by conscription and a command economy which put the resources of all productive endeavor under the strict control of elected and appointed government thugs was a remarkable lack of resistance against top-down ordination of every aspect of the private citizen’s life, speech, and even his thought.
That Mr. Hymen didn’t speak in his letter to The Proceedings about either Dr. James or that pshrink’s explicit objective in coming up with this ostensibly pacifist but undeniably viciously aggressive violation of individual human rights – using various sorts of “permanent emergency” to override resistance to the government-as-god machinations of those we correctly term “Liberal” fascists today – remarks sadly on the quality of the curriculum at Canoe U., but it don’t surprise me none.
The progressives just loved this permanent state of emergency model. It became their formula for success.
And lest we forget that the progressive movement began in the Republican Party (remember Teddy Roosevelt?), take special note of Richard Milhous Nixon’s enthusiastic stomp job on the Bill of Rights with his glorious “War on (Some) Drugs.”
Inasmuch as the frenetic “catastrophic” AGW alarmists of the past thirty years are without significant exception “Liberal” fascists – whether they’re calling themselves “progressives” this week again or not – that they should frame their attack upon industrialized civilization as the moral equivalent of war against “man-made global climate change” is utterly unsurprising.
This “moral equivalent of war” bullpuckey has been the stock-in-trade of American statist sons of canine parentage ever since Dr. James spewed it more than a century ago. Those of us old enough to have experienced the Carter Malaise and that cement-headed slimeball’s disgusting “Moral Equivalent of War Speech” (18 April 1977) on the then-prevalent “Energy Crisis” (and do please read through that Wiki-bloody-pedia article, willya? Makes me tingle all down one leg to read again that socialist spew of “sacrifice” and “let’s all pull together!” that made even Ronald Reagan [yuck!] look like salvation by comparison when the 1980 elections rolled around).
If you’re too young to have any real appreciation of Jimmy Carter as an earlier iteration of our current Marxist Mombasa Messiah (’cause the teachers’ union types sure as hell want nothing to do with honest talk about the hideous wreck he made of both our domestic economy and our foreign policy), consider that in the summer of 1980, the running joke around the table in the hospital cafeteria where the medical staff used to congregate – the one that was right next to two phones on the wall so we could answer our pages – was that the Open Market Committee of the Federal Reserve oughtta be re-named “The Committee to Re-Elect Jimmy Carter,” because at every sweaty, frenetic meeting they were conjuring counterfeit currency out of thin air at an annualized inflation rate of 20%.
They didn’t call it “quantitative easing” back then, but the intention was a Keynesian “prime the pump” effort to jump-start the economy and prevent the Peanut Farmer from getting his butt bounced out of the White House.
Ah, nostalgia. Those were the years in which everybody learned the word “stagflation,” which those mainstream (i.e., Keynesian) economics professors in school had taught us all was flatly impossible.
But to get back to Lieutenant (JG) Hymen’s letter in Proceedings.
Any time you hear anybody puking up this “moral equivalent of war” bilge, get your hand on your wallet and your hackles up. They’re trying to work plunder upon you, and your utter enslavement if they can get away with it.
Let us hate and oppose the Watermelon warmists, not simply because their “science” is manifestly and maliciously fraudulent but primarily because they’re “Liberal” fascists intent upon turning our republic from the rule of law into a reign of tyranny.
Mr. Hymen ought to be informed of that, too. After all, it’s his duty as a commissioned officer of the Naval Service to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

Quite interesting..but it shows more of the adolescent-like inability of the average american of being able to deal with having been comprehensively defeated in war but a courageous and valiant people. It seems not many people have picked up on this. But then I’m British so a little bit more sensitive to these obvious signals.
This has a lot of similarities to the Vietnam War….And the skeptics are the Viet Cong… Not fighting like ‘Gentlemen’ at all
when will you learn.