France imposes Soviet Style Movement Restrictions on Climate Activists

France embracing Soviet Style Abuse of Due Process
France embracing Soviet Style Abuse of Due Process

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

France has arbitrarily imposed Soviet style movement restrictions on a number of climate activists. French Authorities claim this measure is necessary, to reduce the risk of public disorder during the COP21 conference.

According to the Australian ABC;

French climate change activists have been placed under house arrest ahead of the opening of the UN climate change conference in Paris.

Public demonstrations are banned in France under the state of emergency that was declared after the Paris terrorist attacks two week ago, in which 130 people were killed.

Green groups have described the move as “an abuse of power” but the French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said the activists were suspected of planning violent protests.

“These 24 people have been placed under house arrest because they have been violent during demonstrations in the past and because they have said they would not respect the state of emergency,” he said.

They must remain in their home towns, report to the local police three times a day and abide by a nightly curfew until December 12, when the climate change conference winds up.

A delegation of environmental organisations met with French president Francois Hollande to appeal against the measures.

Greenpeace International’s executive Director Kumi Naidoo said he was “disappointed” that France’s political leadership would “choose to enable sporting events, trade exhibitions and other arts and culture events to go ahead, but with such a clamp down on the space for the biggest issue humanity faces”.

Read more: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-29/climate-protesters-banned-in-paris-security-crackdown/6983870

For once I agree with Greenpeace. The people whose freedoms France has arbitrarily trampled, are not accused of a specific crime. But France, a country which President Obama openly admires, and frequently describes as America’s staunchest ally, does not recognise Western norms of jurisprudence.

Under the French Code Napoleon, the state has almost unconstrained power to trample the rights of citizens, especially once a state of emergency has been declared, as has been the case since the Paris terror attack. While the French legal system pays lip service to the rights of the accused, in practice French authorities have arbitrary power to treat accused people as if they were guilty of a crime, without first having to establish their guilt in a court of law.

The possibility for justice to endorse lengthy remand periods was one reason why the Napoleonic Code was criticized for de facto presumption of guilt, particularly in common law countries. Another reason was the combination of magistrate and prosecutor in one position.[7] However, the legal proceedings did not have de jure presumption of guilt; for instance, the juror’s oath explicitly recommended that the jury did not betray the interests of the defendants, and paid attention to the means of defence.

Read more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Code

I’m no fan of green activists with a history of violence. France may even be right, about the intentions of the people they arbitrarily restrained. But France has not provided formal evidence that the people affected by this state curfew on their movements are guilty of a crime, or were conspiring to commit a crime – they justified this action on the basis of an official suspicion.

If you don’t stand against injustice, even when the victims of that injustice are people you detest, then who will speak for you, when your and your friend’s rights are being trampled?

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
5 1 vote
Article Rating
274 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jaakko Kateenkorva
November 29, 2015 5:08 am

France may even be right, about the intentions of the people they arbitrarily restrained.

The qualifier ‘arbitrarily’ can be discussed. For example, Strasbourg in April 2009:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxocQ_aGgwY

Reply to  Jaakko Kateenkorva
November 29, 2015 6:17 am

Excellent videos – worth watching – thank you Jaakko.
This senseless violence is common criminal conduct by leftists at global summits and is routinely tolerated by authorities,
These are the same people who form the brownshirt brigade of the radical-environmental movement. I am familiar with some of their threats and assaults – they have committed very serious criminal acts.
Questions:
Why should shop owners have to tolerate having their businesses trashed by these thugs?
Why should police have to tolerate being assaulted by these thugs?
Why should citizens have to tolerate being threatened and intimidated by these thugs?
If the average citizen did this sort of crime, they would be locked up. I say stop giving these thugs a free pass. Lock them up and make them pay for all the damage they cause.
“Freedom is the right to be wrong, not the right to do wrong.”
John Diefenbaker, March 11, 1958

Sam The First
Reply to  Allan MacRae
November 29, 2015 8:36 am

I agree. Anyone with any knowledge of French history knows how readily the anarchist left will riot: they don’t acknowledge or respect the rule of law and have no care for the carnage they leave in their wake.
It’s the same in London: any political event attracts these lawless thugs hell-bent on the destruction of property, and it’s the ordinary citizen who suffers.
As you sow so shall you reap: these people have brought this on themselves by their prior lawlessness

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Allan MacRae
December 1, 2015 4:24 am
Kauf Buch
November 29, 2015 5:11 am

“If you don’t stand against injustice, even when the victims of that injustice are people you detest, then who will speak for you, when your and your friend’s rights are being trampled?”
How quaint. How touching…BUT: It’s the other way around.
THEY haven’t stood up for US, so why should We for THEM?!
To Hell with the radical terrorist Eco-Nazi Left, in France and around the world.

Reply to  Kauf Buch
November 29, 2015 6:29 am

Kauf Buch:
It is not a question of standing up for ‘them’.
It is a question of standing up for the same rights and privileges we believe in.

Sam The First
Reply to  ATheoK
November 29, 2015 8:38 am

– and which these anarchists do not believe in.
Should we stand on our principles while those who care nothing for the rule of law cause mayhem in our cities?

Kauf Buch
Reply to  ATheoK
November 29, 2015 9:49 am

Oh, Sweet, Dear, Poor ATheoK…
enjoy the fragrant smell of those flowers in your hair as you dance to the hippie music…
…AS IF “rights and privileges” mean ANYTHING to them.
WHAT FOOL thinks that, must also believe the same about muzzies.
You are a SOON-TO-BE-BEHEADED slave to your ideology.
When it comes to survival, that’s a luxury too far.
The rest of us will fight, so stand back and hide, coward.

Kauf Buch
Reply to  ATheoK
November 29, 2015 10:02 am
bezotch
Reply to  ATheoK
November 29, 2015 1:41 pm

Kauf Buch:
It isn’t about whether these rights and privileges mean anything to them.
It is about whether or not these rights and privileges mean anything to us.
If it does we must grit our teeth and stand up for them.
If not, it is meaningless blather.

Aphan
Reply to  ATheoK
November 29, 2015 7:53 pm

ATheoK and bezotch-
My principles require that I either obey and uphold the laws where I live, OR that I take legal and proper action to have them changed. My principles do not allow me to ignore those laws. They do not allow me to sit, even peacefully, in the middle of a public street, or chain myself quietly to a door I don’t own, or to invite my friends to mingle at the town square after midnight if a curfew has been put in place. Why? Because my principles do not allow me to trample on the other rights that belong to my fellow citizens just so I can express my opinion about the ones I might disagree with. For ANY reason. My right to object doesn’t supersede my neighbor’s right to drive without worrying about people in the street, or the property rights of whoever owns the door, or the rights of everyone in town to have an available and unfettered police force protect them while they sleep.
My principles demand that I be willing to sacrifice some things, within reason and for short periods of time, for the good and safety of everyone (which includes me and my loved ones), if I want to keep my freedom. And I HOPE that the principles of my fellow citizens demand the same thing.
You seem to believe that the government of a free society’s job is to enact certain civil laws that protect you and everything you want, while at the same time demanding that the same government allows for “civil disobedience”-which is the refusal to obey laws which one personally finds unjust or believes to be immoral. You have no “right” to expect that, nor does such a thing even make sense. And if you think it does, then I expect you to support me breaking into your house and sampling your Thanksgiving leftovers, then taking your car to run errands, and not paying my taxes this year. I personally find all laws that say I can’t to be unjust or immoral.
It is YOU whose principles must sew-saw back and forth in order to quell the logical dissonance such thinking creates.

Kauf Buch
Reply to  ATheoK
November 30, 2015 11:48 am

to “bezotch”
My my my…how “THE-WORLD-ACTS-EXACTLY-AS-I-IMAGINE-IT” of you.
That is not only DEEPLY CHILDISH, but…
…FATAL CONCEIT. FATAL NARCISSISM.
Go ahead, GO DIE in the name of “non-violence” you idiot.
How “brave….and how DEAD.
Take your “peace ‘n’ love ‘n’ ideological purity” minstrel show to islamic countries.
Let your corpse tell us how persuasive you were.

bezotch
Reply to  ATheoK
December 1, 2015 7:38 pm

Kauf Buch
Since all I’ve seen from you on this site is taunting and name calling, I have to conclude, that it is the limit of what you can contribute to an intellectual discussion, and will in the future just ignore you.
Gotta love guys who talk tough behind the anonymity of the internet. They have “virtual cahones”.

Aphan
Reply to  bezotch
December 1, 2015 8:01 pm

bezotch said to Kauf Buch
“Since all I’ve seen from you on this site is taunting and name calling, I have to conclude, that it is the limit of what you can contribute to an intellectual discussion, and will in the future just ignore you.”
“Gotta love guys who talk tough behind the anonymity of the internet. They have “virtual cahones”.
Oh that is rich! Your contributions are illogical and irrational, and you preach a strange morality from the anonymity of the internet. And the word is “cojones”, you intellectual master you. *rolls eyes*

Marcus
Reply to  Kauf Buch
November 29, 2015 7:12 am

+ 10,000

Dodgy Geezer
November 29, 2015 5:12 am

…Under the French Code Napoleon, the state has almost unconstrained power to trample the rights of citizens, especially once a state of emergency has been declared, as has been the case since the Paris terror attack. While the French legal system pays lip service to the rights of the accused, in practice French authorities have arbitrary power to treat accused people as if they were guilty of a crime, without first having to establish their guilt in a court of law….
I’m afraid that you will find that Common Law countries, like the US and the UK, are not actually much different.
The politicians just say they are different – but they will breach fundamental principles just as easily…

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Dodgy Geezer
November 29, 2015 5:19 am

Add Australia to that list.

Aphan
Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 29, 2015 7:54 pm

And the United States of America.

simple-touriste
Reply to  Dodgy Geezer
November 29, 2015 5:24 am

Do Common Law countries moral equivalents of “juges d’instruction” tap the line of former President/PM?

Patrick MJD
Reply to  simple-touriste
November 29, 2015 5:32 am

The only country I know that upholds “common law” is the UK. I do not know of any other that does. And that “right” in the UK is being eroded…day by day. Ramblers, greenies etc…all want “us” to stop doing what “we” have been doing for thousands of years in England. Ancient roads and paths, the greens (Ramblers, horse riders association etc) want to ban most other users from access.

simple-touriste
Reply to  simple-touriste
November 29, 2015 6:46 am

Some juges d’instruction say that prison for the people being investigated “soften the meat”.
Now at least there is the “chambre de l’instruction” for judicial overview of the juges d’instruction, but it doesn’t seem very effective.

1saveenergy
Reply to  simple-touriste
November 29, 2015 8:05 am

Patrick MJD
are you saying us Brits are more ‘common’ than most ??

Patrick MJD
Reply to  simple-touriste
November 29, 2015 9:49 pm

“1saveenergy
November 29, 2015 at 8:05 am”
Nope! I just said the only country I know that upholds “common law” is the UK. I used to live in the UK and many pressure groups (Ramblers, horse riders etc) wanted to remove access to byways, roads used as public paths (RUPPs) and white/unclassified roads to other users. For instance, there are thousands and thousands of footpaths and bridleways in England. Ancient paths, thousands of years old. Some actually cross private property. In common law, everyone in the UK has the right to use these paths. And if they do cross private property, in common law, you have the right to cross without asking. Most people are polite and ask to cross and are usually granted access.

troe
November 29, 2015 5:26 am

In a sense the optics of street chaos in Paris would be an enlightening moment for the world video audience. Watermelons on full display while the carnage of the last attack is still being repaired.
Greenpeace is a reprehensible organization. The more they are seen the better.

pochas
November 29, 2015 5:28 am

There are two distinct modes of behavior and we are either in one or the other. The first is political correctness where we try to accommodate every mewling complaint from those who don the mantle of victimhood. The second is when the first results in massive disorder and we recognize the need for extraordinary measures.

Dahlquist
Reply to  pochas
November 29, 2015 6:58 am

pochas…Agree 100%.
One thing that really gets me is how the MSM jump all over and extensively cover riots and civil disobedience which causes further and more intense disorder, spreading it to more cities, etc… The rioters want the attention and display more & more outrageous acts, attracting more idiot rioters and spreading the ‘fun’.
The MSM claim that the public needs to know and point to the right of ‘freedom of the press’, but it is mostly for ratings, money, and some field reporters need for “claims to fame’ for future resumes. A person watching the news coverage of riots by the news anchors can almost see their drooling and excitement with each burning building or injured person. Sickening.

Sam The First
Reply to  Dahlquist
November 29, 2015 8:42 am

Agreed. Years ago in Tuscany I was impressed by Italian TV and the Sienese, when there was the start of a riot the night before the Palio in the main square. The TV cameras were immediately switched off and hooded, and the locals politely asked all those of us with cameras to put them away.
The riot which could have got nasty fizzled out very fast.

Aphan
Reply to  pochas
November 29, 2015 8:00 pm

False dichotomy. There are more than “two distinct modes of behavior”, and we are currently not yet in the second one you list. The French are trying to prevent massive disorder on top of recovering from a terrorist attack. These are not ordinary times, so of course they call for extraordinary measures. But those measures shouldn’t come as a shock or offense to anyone intelligent. Such measures have long been in place for a reason. It’s called history.

Stephen Richards
November 29, 2015 5:33 am

Je soutien mon president. Je souhaite qu’il a emprisonné le greenpiss et al.

Reply to  Stephen Richards
November 29, 2015 5:55 am

“I support my president. I wish he had imprisoned greenpiss et al.”

Russ Armstrong
November 29, 2015 5:35 am

France responded to an act of war by imposing martial law on its subjects. We’re there to be a similar attack in the US, one can only imagine who would be locked up if Obama declared martial law. Global warming skeptics for certain.

simple-touriste
Reply to  Russ Armstrong
November 29, 2015 5:39 am

“France responded to an act of war by imposing martial law on its subjects.”
This is new.
When did this non event happened?

Dahlquist
Reply to  simple-touriste
November 29, 2015 7:01 am

Ok simple-touriste, some non French here do not distinguish Martial Law from the restrictions France placed upon its citizens. So, please explain the restrictions that France has imposed.

simple-touriste
Reply to  simple-touriste
November 29, 2015 7:46 am

The “état d’urgence” means many things:
the government could take control of the press, which would be quite meaningless when the press is hyping the government and the COP21, and critics are sacked (*)
– home searches before 6:00 AM
home search without juge control
– curfews can be decided by the “préfet” (delegate of the state in a “département”)
– selling bottles of alcohol, carrying and drinking alcohol in public and transporting drinks in glass bottles after 8:00 PM has been forbidden in Nord (region of Lille): decided the 14th of November, cancelled the 21th

(*) recently sacked in the French medias:
– TV: Philippe Verdier on France Television (criticism of COP21 related hysteria)
– radio: Thomas Guénolé on RMC: criticism of the disorganisation and inefficiency of the police during the killing of Bataclan (specialised security forces arrived late and the first police arrived had only weak armor)
Discussing either climate alarmism or police inefficiency are strong taboos in France.

Bulldust
Reply to  simple-touriste
December 2, 2015 10:17 pm

In an ironic twist Philippe Verdier is now free to speak courtesy of Russian Television (RT) and is reporting from COP21. Perhaps the title of the blog post needs editing, it seems the Russians value (his) free speech more than the French…

Aphan
Reply to  Russ Armstrong
November 29, 2015 8:14 pm

You either do not know what martial law is, or you don’t care. What Paris is doing is not martial law, and the current US President declaring a state of emergency would not be either.

tgmccoy
November 29, 2015 5:44 am

Awfully easy to hide a suicide bomber in a polar
bear suit, if you ask me..

John McClure
Reply to  tgmccoy
November 29, 2015 11:23 am

+1 – completely agree! Also, imposing a Soviet symbol on the flag of France is repulsive!

bezotch
Reply to  tgmccoy
November 29, 2015 1:56 pm

Really?
That’s your threshold for justifying the restriction of civil liberties?

simple-touriste
Reply to  bezotch
November 29, 2015 2:11 pm

The fundamental liberty of wearing a bear suit in a crowd?

Aphan
Reply to  bezotch
November 29, 2015 6:17 pm

bezotch, you seem to lack even the most basic social/communication skill thresholds, such as not making wildly illogical assumptions about total strangers and then appearing to be incredulous to your own make believe.

Village Idiot
November 29, 2015 5:45 am

Seems to be becoming a bit of a tradition at the big COP meetings:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/16/us-denmark-climate-arrests-idUSTRE6BF3ZA20101216#klJ4swyzVlEuxOop.97
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-12010416
“I guess this is what Danish democracy anno 2009 looks like….”:

Reply to  Village Idiot
November 29, 2015 9:08 am

And think of J Hansen, R Pachauri, M Mann et al.comment image

Billy Liar
Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
November 29, 2015 1:17 pm

I love that, Hansen being arrested by a cop called ‘Green’!

Janne
November 29, 2015 5:53 am

If there would be groups organizing violent protests at football games etc, those groups would be banned also.
French police want to keep as many police available to be able to respond to potential terrorist threat. Not have their officers ties to babysitting demonstrators who think they get their message through only by rioting.
These 24 would not be grounded if they had behaved before.

November 29, 2015 5:59 am

I don’t have enough facts on which to base an opinion about that specific action. But it does seem that in much of Europe the rights to free speech and association have already reached the level to which anti-discrimination laws and sanctions for hate speech are rapidly taking them in the U.S. : http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/427693/another-reminder-free-speech-not-european-value?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_content=5659bb2004d3011b980224b2&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

simple-touriste
Reply to  Joe Born
November 29, 2015 9:56 am

Last year, some people have been arrested apparently for wearing a “famille pour tous” (anti gay marriage) T-shirt.
Some anti-gay marriage people have been put in custody, moved around, kept for hours or even days, then freed.
This was just bullying.

troe
November 29, 2015 6:01 am

The Google boys and their Special Advisor Al Gore are in the game. They have a little “speak up on climate change” blurb on the home page.
Here’s my thought Brin and Page… climate change is a known natural phenomenon. Why are you making it out to be phantom in the closet. Stop doing evil with your big bag of money little boy.

November 29, 2015 6:02 am

Anthony, moderators etal,
Make contact with Sheryl Attkisson the former CBS reporter who has gone independent and is now with Sinclair Broadcasting.
She has the honesty and integrity needed to go after the facts.
She has a new show named Full Measure.
Get her together with Congressman Larmar Smith who is the Chairman of the House Science Committee.
See article in Washington Times today by Smith.
Only facts can save U S All now.

November 29, 2015 6:31 am

I’m sure it wouldn’t interest anybody outside of a small circle of friends …

Phil Ochs
1967

November 29, 2015 6:50 am

Paris Stages Climate Shoe-In
French capital stages symbolic climate march with thousands of pairs of shoes as COP21 climate conference opens
http://www.wsj.com/articles/paris-stages-climate-shoe-in-1448800928

Patrick MJD
Reply to  rovingbroker
November 29, 2015 6:53 am

Insane! Now where do we usually see lots of shoes outside somewhere?

simple-touriste
Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 29, 2015 9:49 am

“Now where do we usually see lots of shoes outside somewhere?”
Something to do with the color green?

simple-touriste
Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 29, 2015 9:08 pm

The man with the small moustache was into deep ecology, too.
Something (conveniently) not taught at school.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 29, 2015 9:34 pm

I did say usually Aphan. Those images are not what one finds usually.

DDP
November 29, 2015 6:57 am

And yet none one person here protested one bit at Greenpiss being banned from operating in India. I will never understand the need for these people to even protest the issue when thousands of like minded religiously driven people have all arrived in Paris to try and find a way to combat what they are protesting in the first place.That’s an even more pointless way to spend your time than try to stop something that cannot be stopped.
I wonder how many of those protesters were there to to speak out against the massive waste of of government money when it could go towards technological investment in energy, reducing poverty, eradicating disease etc etc. No, it’ll just be the usual polar bears, 97%, big oil, capitalists corrupting the world crap and countless other clichés based on bad science and political/religious indoctrination to ‘the cause’.
Seeing as the French will protest absolutely everything and anything at the drop of a hat, quite often having an economical knock on effect here in the UK, I just don’t care. Sorry ’bout that.

Barbara
Reply to  DDP
November 29, 2015 6:47 pm

Anyway these would only be the Greenpeace foot-soldiers. The big people behind Greenpeace will stay behind the scenes.

PaulH
November 29, 2015 7:33 am

Current news reports of violent climate protests in Paris:
“French riot police fired tear gas at activists protesting as part of global climate demonstrations Sunday, on the eve of the COP21 climate summit in Paris.
About 200 protesters, some wearing masks, fought with police on a street leading to the Place de la Republique, which has become a gathering place for Parisians since the terror attacks on Nov. 13.”
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/global-climate-march-record-numbers-turn-out-climate-protests-n470836

michael hart
November 29, 2015 7:41 am

I’ll only support them in so far as governments usually over-react to terrorist attacks, restricting civil liberties in an attempt to be seen to be “doing something”.
But, as others have pointed out, they publicly announced their intention to break the law (whether it be a good law or a bad law) and put extra demands on the police when it has been determined that demands on the police are already excessive for more important reasons.
Their public announcement of intention to break the law is also inciting others to do the same.
in some ways it is actually a good thing. The French policing authorities have decided that terrorism is a bigger threat than some pissant conference about global warming and its bleating disciples.

Leland Neraho
November 29, 2015 7:48 am

This is a science based website and forum. Please keep your posts to science and not politics or religion.

Reply to  Leland Neraho
November 29, 2015 8:39 am

Leland Neraho. Fortunately that’s up to you here as much as it would be in COP 21.

Leland Neraho
Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
November 29, 2015 10:24 am

Oh, I get it now. You can talk about other subjects that the rest of the readers like, but not when it makes them uncomfortable or exposes that logic inference has to carry not just to climate science, but other areas where the facts are pretty clear. Hint: it’s not politics.

Reply to  Leland Neraho
November 29, 2015 10:39 am

Yo, ‘Leland Neraho’:
Every comment from you is filled with whining and complaining. So I have the solution, and it will make everyone much happier:
Go start your own blog. At your first anniversary, say ‘Hi’ for me to both your readers.

Leland Neraho
Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
November 29, 2015 11:49 am

I’m still waiting for my $44k from Heartland. They said I have a college degree which prevents me from getting funded. Only high schoolers they say.

Leland Neraho
Reply to  jaakkokateenkorva
November 29, 2015 11:59 am

Besides, now that the housing market crash has run its course and there is no more profit to made off of fools who can’t spot anomalies, climate change, or not, is my favorite topic. So why would I go to the “World’s Second Most Viewed Site”? That wouldn’t make sense, would it?

Reply to  Leland Neraho
November 29, 2015 10:57 am

Leland, most of us are all for keeping the politics out science. Unfortunately, the real world isn’t cooperating.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/insight/2015/11/29/01-graded-a-to-f.html

Leland Neraho
Reply to  Gunga Din
November 29, 2015 11:51 am

Then why does this site post back to back articles about cults and Madrasas?

Leland Neraho
Reply to  Gunga Din
November 29, 2015 12:02 pm

In case you don’t have time to read the article, here is the science part of it: “In fact, federal ground-based data, which scientists said is more reliable than satellites, show that 15 of the 17 years after 1997 have been warmer than 1997, and 2015 is on track to top 2014 as the warmest year on record.”

simple-touriste
Reply to  Leland Neraho
November 29, 2015 12:12 pm

Where is the science?

Reply to  Gunga Din
November 29, 2015 12:31 pm

Hey, Leland, here how “settled” GISS is.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
http://web.archive.org/web/20120104220939/http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
Please note, for example, the difference in the January temperatures of the very first year of the surface stations records.
Why did Hansen change them? Was that when the first “coal train of death” ran?

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Gunga Din
November 29, 2015 1:11 pm

Really, Leland Neraho?
Hmm, at this time there are Congressional investigations into the antics of these scientists you speak of. Some of them are breaking the law by refusing to turn over documentation to the oversight committee. Why should anyone accept statements from people who hide data that you and I paid for? And make no mistake the actions these so called scientists are taking has led to contempt charges and jail time for others in the past.
By the way just how many places on the planet in the last ten days, have had record snow falls both in depth and earliest for november.
It’s getting colder each year. More and more people are seeing it, despite what you blither about, people are sitting up and taking notice
Go find a new shtick this one is about played out.
michael

simple-touriste
Reply to  Gunga Din
November 29, 2015 1:38 pm

“but stronger case can be made using surface temperature datasets, which I consider to be more reliable than satellite datasets”
I am sure it can.
But until someone makes this case, there is nothing that can be discussed, if you insist on discussing only science.

Aphan
Reply to  Leland Neraho
November 29, 2015 6:37 pm

Leland, I hate to tell you this, but you are completely incorrect. As Anthony’s WUWT website has stated for years and years now-
“About Watts Up With That? News and commentary on puzzling things in life, nature, science, weather, climate change, technology, and recent news by Anthony Watts”
Please don’t attempt to tell either Anthony or his forum participants what is or is not appropriate to discuss here.

Akatsukami
November 29, 2015 8:00 am

I think it better to write that France does not recognize Anglo-American norms of jurisprudence. Civil law has no less a claim of being “Western” than does common law.

Tom Judd
November 29, 2015 8:01 am

Aw, c’mon folks. Hasn’t anybody ever heard of a restraining order? That’s essentially all this is. A judge will issue a restraining order if a potential victim makes a credible case that someone may pose a danger to them. No witnesses; no subpoenaes; no evidence is necessary; just a credible case for a temporary restraining order. For all practical purposes that’s all this is. This isn’t permanent. And, it involves …house arrest? … boohoo.

michael hart
Reply to  Tom Judd
November 29, 2015 8:34 am

Yes.
If city authorities in the US can legally declare curfews, why should anyone else not be allowed to do the same?

Anoneumouse
November 29, 2015 8:30 am

Eco-Isis

jeff
November 29, 2015 8:43 am

“because they have been violent during demonstrations in the past ”
There’s a word for that: rioters. And rioters are basically trying to terrorize people into going along with them – they should rightfully be shot on the spot.

November 29, 2015 8:58 am

I fully support the French decisions: they well know that these demonstrations rapidly go violent and destructive; in these after-terrorist attacks times French security forces have a hell of a job to do just to assure the security of all the officials coming in for COP21. Just plain common-sense and a bit of patriotism should tell the eco-loons that now is not the time for disruptive action. The last hours show once more that these are not harmless demonstrations done for a noble cause, but violent actions which surely will attract more “casseurs” profiting to make generous shop-lifting.
Eric Worrall’s post is absolutely dispensable!

Dave O.
November 29, 2015 8:58 am

The demonstrators should be allowed to demonstrate their stupidity.

Aphan
Reply to  Dave O.
November 29, 2015 6:42 pm

Not at the expense of the safety or security of anyone else. Their freedom to act stupidly ends at the line where it infringes upon the rights, or protection, of anyone else.