2017: “Deadliest year on record for environmentalists”… Because Trump? Because climate change? Or because bad journalism?

Guest commentary by David Middleton

From the “[fill in the blank] on record” files…

Record 207 environmental activists killed last year

24 JUL 2018

More than 200 environmental activists were murdered last year as government-sponsored killings linked to lucrative projects by vast agriculture multinationals soared, a global rights watchdog warned on Tuesday.

Global Witness said it had documented 207 cases where activists were killed while trying to protect land from development, often for the production of consumer staples such as coffee and palm oil, making 2017 the deadliest year on record for environmentalists.

“As global demand for these products increases, there’s a scramble by business actors to get the massive amount of land they need to grow these products,” Ben Leather, senior campaigner at Global Witness, told AFP.

“When people dare to stand up for their rights and demand that the environment be protected they are silenced in the most brutal way.”

The watchdog said it had found evidence that government actors — soldiers or police — were responsible for 53 of the deaths.


Global Witness’ report on environmentalist killings documents harrowing crimes around the world against communities daring to speak out against big businesses and government-led development.


By far the most frequent victims of violence were indigenous peoples, who are often already maligned by governments and society.



For some reason, I think that many American Indian Nations would take issue with 2017 being the “deadliest year on record for” indigenous peoples, who happened to be in the way of “big businesses and government-led development” of their lands.

And anyone with an IQ above single digits should take issue with calling these victims “environmental activists.”  The headline gives the impression that “big business and “government-led” developers were slaughtering Greenpeace, EDF, NRDC, WWF and 350.org terrorists activists. When, in fact, the article is mostly about government-backed slaughter of indigenous peoples in Brazil, The Philippines and other schist holes developing nations.

Global Witness is a Soros operation

Alexander Soros is the founder of The Alexander Soros Foundation, an organization promoting civil rights, social justice and education. In addition to his advisory board role at Global Witness, he also sits on the boards of Bend the Arc, which supports grassroots efforts to strengthen lower-income neighborhoods across the U.S., and the Open Society Foundations, which work to build vibrant and tolerant democracies. He graduated from New York University and is pursuing a doctorate in European History at the University of California, Berkeley. His op-eds have appeared in The Miami Herald, Politico, and The Guardian.

Alexander is George’s son and Global Witness’ raison d’être appears to be a combination of run-of-the-mill Enviromarxism and Trump Derangement Syndrome…

Global Witness
Report of the directors
For the year ended 31 December 2017

Strategic Report
A summary of our key achievements during 2017 are listed below as well as how we intend to build on and defend these gains in the coming year.

Fighting the US’ descent into kieptocracy

  • Following the 2016 United States’ presidential elections, we began monitoring the increasing parallels between the actions of the President of the United States and his aides and those of kleptocracies like Cambodia, Angola or Equatorial Guinea. 2017 saw a host of moves by the Trump Administration and Congress, backed by the American Petroleum Institute, to attack transparency and anti-corruption efforts. At the beginning of the year we repeatedly raised concerns about the appointment as Secretary of State of Rex Tillerson, the former CEO of ExxonMobil: a company which has a record of engaging in questionable oil deals, and leading attempts to undermine anti-corruption policies, as well as facing allegations of purposefully misleading the public on climate change.
  • We have also been heavily engaged in efforts to ensure that the U.S. Congress cannot undo a vitally important transparency law, which we have been campaigning on for 20 years. The bipartisan law, known as the Cardin Lugar anti-corruption provision, is designed to stop U.S.-listed extractive companies, including ExxonMobil, Chevron and several Chinese oil majors, striking corrupt deals, by requiring them to disclose the details of their payments to governments. In December, all the Republicans (bar one) on the U.S. House Financial Services Committee voted to pass a bill that would repeal the anti-corruption provision. The law remains intact but under threat.
  • In our publication Narco-a-Lago: Money Laundering at the Trump Ocean Club, Panama we revealed how Donald Trump made millions from selling his name to a luxury development used to launder money from Latin American drug cartels over a period of time starting in 2006. While there is no evidence he broke the law, Trump seems to have done little to nothing to prevent this. We also used this investigation to highlight the problem of anonymous companies and property ownership in facilitating money laundering, as part of our global campaign to end anonymous company ownership.


Global Witness Report and Financial Statements 31 December 2017

Speaking of ExxonMobil in Equatorial Guinea, the phrase “win-win” comes to mind.

A win for ExxonMobil…

ExxonMobil makes oil discovery offshore Equatorial Guinea

By Tayvis Dunnahoe
OGJ Exploration Editor

ExxonMobil Corp. is now assessing potential commerciality at its Avestruz-1 well on Block EG-06 160 km offshore Malabo, Equatorial Guinea. The operator drilled the oil discovery in October but has not released any production data.

Block EG-06 is next to the legacy oil-producing Block B and EG-11, ExxonMobil’s most recent acquisition in the region (OGJ Online, June 5, 2017).

Avestruz-1 is adjacent to ExxonMobil’s Zafiro field in Equatorial Guinea’s northern maritime area. Zafiro has produced more than 1 billion bbl of oil since 1996. In May, ExxonMobil subsidiary Mobil Equatorial Guinea Inc. let a 5-year contract to GEPsing to continue operation and maintenance of the Serpentina floating production, storage, and offloading vessel on Zafiro field (OGJ Online, May 12, 2017).

Oil & Gas Journal

And a win for Equatorial Guinea…

ExxonMobil Makes New Oil Find in Equatorial Guinea Block EG-06

The government of Equatorial Guinea has partnered with ExxonMobil in Block EG-06 through a 20-percent stake held by national oil company GEPetrol

  • ExxonMobil discovered oil at its Block EG-06 Avestruz-1 well, drilled in October 2017.
  • Commerciality is yet to be established for the Avestruz discovery.
  • The block is located next to the legacy oil-producing Block B and EG-11, ExxonMobil’s most recently signed acreage.

MALABO, Equatorial Guinea, Dec. 11, 2017 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — ExxonMobil (http://corporate.ExxonMobil.com) has struck oil with its Avestruz-1 well in Block EG-06, announced the Ministry of Mines and Hydrocarbons of Equatorial Guinea (www.EquatorialOil.com). The well was drilled in October 2017. The operator is now assessing potential commerciality.

Avestruz-1 is located approximately 160 kilometers offshore Malabo in an exploration area adjacent to ExxonMobil’s Zafiro field, a prolific legacy oilfield in Equatorial Guinea’s northern maritime area. The company signed its production sharing contract for Block EG-06 in 2015, followed by its entry into nearby Block EG-11 in 2017.

“Equatorial Guinea’s partnership with ExxonMobil continues to yield new oil discoveries, testifying to the huge potential in this country and our enabling environment for oil and gas exploration,” said Minister of Mines and Hydrocarbons H.E. Gabriel Mbaga Obiang Lima. “We hope that commerciality will be established at Avestruz-1 and look forward to seeing more developments in the areas surrounding Block B.”

The government of Equatorial Guinea has partnered with ExxonMobil in Block EG-06 through a 20-percent stake held by national oil company GEPetrol. An ExxonMobil local subsidiary is the operator with 80 percent. At the Zafiro field in Block B, ExxonMobil’s affiliate has a 71.25 percent interest, GEPetrol has 23.75 percent and the state has 5 percent. Since 1996 Zafiro has produced over 1 billion barrels of oil.

Global Newswire

What’s a more likely pathway for Equatorial Guinea to join the “First World”?

  • ExxonMobil and other oil companies partnering with them to develop their petroleum resources.
  • Global Witness and other Enviromarxist terrorist activist groups preventing ExxonMobil and other oil companies partnering with them to develop their petroleum resources.

Feature image source.

308 thoughts on “2017: “Deadliest year on record for environmentalists”… Because Trump? Because climate change? Or because bad journalism?

  1. If you think TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome ) is bad now, Wait until the Nov 2018 Red Wave swamps the “Democratic Socialists” in a Red Tsunami !
    Exibit A) “Donald Trump’s Hollywood Walk of Fame star destroyed with pickaxe”

    Exibit B) “Connecticut official slammed for taking a knee to protest Trump during pledge”

    Like the band said.. “You ain’t seen nuthin’ yet !”

  2. Don’t forget that Soros was a Nazi collaborator as a teen in WWII against his own people! I guess enough money and all is forgotten and forgiven by some. Now he’s a commie! Bottom of the barrel.

    • Soros has done a LOT of evil, and continues to do a lot of evil. The world would be a far better place if he were a pauper. But, as far as can be established, this particular accusation is false. It is a gross distortion of history. It’s a smear.

      Unless he’s lying about his age, he was a 14yo kid in 1944-45, when the incident in question happened. He says he was posing as the adopted godson of a Christian protector, who was ordered by the NAZIs to assist them in taking inventory of the confiscated property of a rich Jew who had fled the country, and he brought his “son” (Soros, who was using an assumed name) with him. As far as can be established, Soros did NOT “work for the NAZIs” or have a “job with the NAZIs,” nor otherwise take part in their crimes.

      On VE Day Soros had not yet turned 15. I’m sure that some 14 year-olds actually fought the NAZIs, and Soros didn’t, but 14yo war heros are very rare. It is possible that, at age 14, he did evil deeds that he doesn’t talk about now, but there doesn’t seem to be any evidence of that. There’s no evidence that Soros materially assisted the NAZIs in their crimes.

      • prior to accompanying his fake godfather on scavenger inventorying (he says he only did this once), he was a courier for a (shill) jewish group that the germans used to track (and arrest) other jews.

        he says that, once he figured it out, he tried to warn the recipients of his courier notices and then he quit ….

        To summarize, per Soros, he was a 14 year old Jewish kid working for a Jewish organization that was, at best, unwittingly helping the nazis. This Jewish kid then figures out that he is sending lawyers to jail and then death (they happen to be Jewish), so he warns them and quits working for the Jewish organization that is collaborating with the nazis. (so yes, he did materially help….)

        Shortly after (still 14 years old), this Jewish kid is transferred to a “Christian” friend of the kids’ father as his fake godson. The “Christian” is also happens to be involved with ripping off the Jews & their stuff (collaborating?) and Soros tags along on the inventory visits (only once per Soros).

        Then, there is a couple of years of benign existence where absolutely nothing happens, and Soros moves to England at 17 years old.

        (Soros, in his interviews, repeatedly seems to say he feels no guilt, because if he didn’t do it someone else would have.)

        BUT, prior to any of this he saw his father create the fake documents to help people hide or leave Hungary because they feared for their lives/deaths. For poor people, Soros says that the father charged only enough to cover his costs for the documents; in other instances he charged wealthy people a crapload … whatever he could get from them (never let a good crisis go to waste). This early life view of making money ultimately lead to Soros’ later broad economic analysis/concept that he termed “reflexivity”. It is closely related to “gouging” during a catastrophe; except, Soros’ plan is to create the problem event in order to take advantage desperate people, rather than wait for the natural course of events push others into desperation.

        I don’t care about the nazi/jew/collaboration questions associated with Soros. I just know he is a piece of shit.

      • There’s a YouTube video of an old CBS 60 Minutes interview with Soros where I recall him saying his character was developed during that period.

    • It’s completely false, and has been debunked for many years. Calling him a commie is false, too.

      • It’s not completely false but most of us are probably grateful not to have been in a similar position at 14.

        Transcript 20 December 1998 broadcast of ’60 Minutes’

        KROFT: My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson.
        SOROS: Yes. Yes.
        KROFT: Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.
        SOROS: Yes. That’s right. Yes.
        KROFT: I mean, that’s — that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?
        SOROS: Not — not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don’t — you don’t see the connection. But it was — it created no — no problem at all.
        KROFT: No feeling of guilt?
        SOROS: No.
        KROFT: For example that, ‘I’m Jewish and here I am, watching these people go. I could just as easily be there. I should be there.’ None of that?
        SOROS: Well, of course I c — I could be on the other side or I could be the one from whom the thing is being taken away. But there was no sense that I shouldn’t be there, because that was — well, actually, in a funny way, it’s just like in markets — that if I weren’t there — of course, I wasn’t doing it, but somebody else would — would — would be taking it away anyhow. And it was the — whether I was there or not, I was only a spectator, the property was being taken away. So the — I had no role in taking away that property. So I had no sense of guilt.

        • Certainly one cannot blame him for doing what he felt necessary, as a 14 year old, to survive.

          That does not however in any way excuse his conduct over the last 30 years. He has willingly paid to forment chaos for the purpose of personal profit, to the detriment of the society as a whole. Recall that he was older than 14 when he received a felony conviction for insider trading .

          So when Soros gets to Hell the helping-the-Nazis incident will probably only warrant a 3×5 card entry, hardly worthy of noting compared to the thick volumes of his other misdeeds

          • “Certainly one cannot blame him for doing what he felt necessary, as a 14 year old, to survive.”
            well, lot of 14 year olds were in the same straits at that time and didn’t turn to sh#t. And what he’s done since shows his true totalitarian/anti-Semitic character. So, roll the movie backwards and it tells you….

            And his paid [pruned] trolls.

            [Watch your language. .mod]

        • German and Austrian and Croatian and Yugoslavian and Romanian and Bulgarian boys his age and younger WERE fighting in uniform with military weapons against the Russian, the American, and the British field armies and tanks.
          Those of Soros age and younger WERE FIGHTING out of uniform against all those armies as messengers, assistants, spies (military observers) and informants, and against any domestic enemies their government declared enemies of the state, such as the Jews, protesters, dissidents, etc.

        • Nigel Sherratt

          “It’s not completely false but most of us are probably grateful not to have been in a similar position at 14.”

          He may be a piece of shit now as many maintain (and I have no opinion on him other than I despise socialists), but what a dreadful conundrum to face at 14 years old. Collaborate, or die, probably like much of his family.

          I suspect I could condemn him for a lot of things, but not that.

    • As a 14 year old Hungarian Jew, Sorros, in fear for his life, and living with a friend of the family, Christian, for protection, helped clear out properties after jews had been deported.

      Is that collaboration?

      Are the jews, forced to load bodies into the crematoria, collaborators?

      Are those forced to work for the Nazis in their factories, collaborators?

      • Well strictly yes, working together but what were his options? No good ones. The musicians playing in the camps had few too. Somehow we survived the 20th century. I hope my grandchildren make it through the 21st. The Klezmer Conservatory Band’s version of Leonard Cohen’s ‘Dance Me to the End of Love’ is a symbol of survival and hope.

      • “… after jews had been deported….” ?

        Are the Jews, forced to load the deported Jews into the crematoria, collaborators?

      • Chris

        It seems you revere the man, yet he’s a convicted criminal. But you condemn Trump who, I don’t think, has ever been convicted of anything criminal in his life.

        However, I would agree with you doubtless maintaining that a leopard can change it’s spots, and perhaps Soros did. So why not Trump? And he had the advantage of an elevated springboard of moral fortitude to leap from.

        And I believe Trump was a contributor to the Democrats some years ago, recognised his mistake, and became a Republican. It seems Soros doesn’t have that personal insight, moral fortitude, or the courage to admit he was wrong.

        But how could he? He’s a convicted fraudster.

        • Where did I say I revere the man? I’m saying calling a 14 year old who is asked to tag along with a guy who is collecting possessions does not make him a Nazi collaborator. What would you have him do? Call it out and go to the gas chambers?

          You call out Soros for fraud, but ignore Trump’s. Go ahead and explain to me why Trump University was not fraudulent. You do know that Trump settled for $25M rather than have the case go to court, right? You do know that he has cheated many, many contractors out of funds owed them, and only paid up when taken to court.

          Since you mentioned the Republican party, perhaps you can enlighten me on Republican party positions on issues. Rs used to be for free trade agreements, now they are against them. Rs used to be for balancing the budget, now budget deficits are exploding. Rs used to be against foreign intervention, now they are picking fights where none exist, such as with Iran. Rs used to stand against tyrants, now they get invited to the White House.

          • “picking fights where none exist, such as with Iran”

            Then you haven’t been paying attention. The Iranian President leads marches that chant “Death to America”. Do you think the 100,000 in the marches are just kidding? Or is there another America that nobody knows about?

            The “fight” as you say, has been on for quite some time.

          • Chris

            “You call out Soros for fraud, but ignore Trump’s. Go ahead and explain to me why Trump University was not fraudulent.”

            Aw come on, that’s an easy one. Trump wasn’t convicted of fraud, Soros was.

            “You do know that he has cheated many, many contractors out of funds owed them, and only paid up when taken to court.”

            Business is tough. He paid when he needed to. I’m not unfamiliar with the threats issued by dissatisfied contractors. Equally, I have taken some to court myself.

            “Rs used to be for free trade agreements”.

            Yep, good old sanctions in a free trade world are a fact of life. Study the business case history [snip], been going on for thousands of years, not just since you were born.

            “Rs used to be for balancing the budget, now budget deficits are exploding.”

            Like America’s budget was under control in the Obama years? It seems the man drunk a lot because America has one hell of a hangover.

            “Rs used to be against foreign intervention, now they are picking fights where none exist, such as with Iran.”

            Last week your bitch was about certain nuclear war with N. Korea. This week it’s Iran. Trump got the poisoned little N. Korean troll to the negotiating table which is more than any other president in the last 50 years has done, but of course Trump’s bad. He should have bombed Kim then you would have really been upset. Nothing satisfies you people.

            Fortunately, Trump has threatened war and not carried out his threats because his objectives were realised. I can’t say that about any other recent POTUS.

            Iran is the same. An upstart country managed by religious fanatics, and you somehow support that? How about the Ayatollah slings a nuclear weapon in your direction, that’ll wipe the smug expression off your face.

            The Korean war, Vietnam and Iraq evidently don’t count as interventionist according to you. Complete disasters of course. And Trump would rather build a golf course on their land. But that’s bad.

            You need to examine your priorities mate.

          • Hot Scot
            ….I can’t say that about any other recent POTUS.

            Shouldn’t the plural of POTUS be POTI ?
            ..or am I displaying my age and classical education!?

            Splendid rant nevertheless! I’m all on board with you

          • HotScot,

            Haha…normal American joke.

            We take a word ending with “s” and pretend to make it plural by using the Latin format. Thus, POTUS would become potii (I think two i’s would be more correct…). Just a silly joke.


          • RE: “…now they are picking fights where none exist, such as with Iran.”

            And what planet might that be on? Where were you in 1979? And I suppose mobs in the streets of Iran shouting “Death to America, death to Israel” is a non-problem? When somebody says they want to kill me, my country and our closest allies and is actively building weapons (nuclear) to do it with, the fight has already been picked, child.

          • Where were you in 1979?
            I was in Tehran for a while. So what?
            Crowds everywhere become stupid when infected by maniacs.
            The Shah was doing more good by far than his successors.
            So what?
            Some of you guys seem easily led and emotional merely by reading the words of authors you have never met. Try limiting your words to actual factual experiences. Geoff

          • Trump is for fair trade and I assume most Republicans are for that, too.

            The U.S. is running an annual $850 billion deficit with other nations which is obviously unfair. Trump wants to eliminate that $850 billion deficit by convincing other nations to play fair. Trump is using tariffs against those who are not playing fair in hopes of convincing them to change their unfair business practices.

            Dems didn’t worry about budget deficits until Trump won the election. Now they want to pretend to be fiscally responsible. Don’t make me laugh!

            Chris wrote: “Rs used to be against foreign intervention, now they are picking fights where none exist, such as with Iran.”

            I guess you haven’t been paying attention. The U.S. has been at war with the Mad Mullahs of Iran since 1979. Or rather, the Mad Mullahs have been at war with the U.S. since 1979, and past U.S. presidents have refused to do anything about it and allowed the Mad Mullahs to continue their murderous ways. The Mad Mullahs are responsible for many American deaths and they need to pay for that.

            Trump is not going to let the Mad Mullahs have a free ride anymore. Trump is going to try to talk them out of their murderous ways but if that doesn’t work, and the Mad Mullahs continue down the road they are going, then there will be war between the Mad Mullahs and the United States.

            But take heart: Trump is agitating the Iranian population to revolt against the Mad Mullahs and they just might do it this time. They might have done it when Obama was in Office, but they saw pretty quickly that Obama was on the side of the Mad Mullahs, not the Iranian population. That’s not the case with Trump and they can see it.

            I would say the Mad Mullahs are on shaky ground whether they maintain power or not.

            Sometimes wars are necessary to remove very evil people from this world before they can do even more damage. A war against the Mad Mullahs would be such a war.

            I notice you didn’t mention that Trump may have prevented a nuclear war with North Korea where no telling how many innocent people would have died. Doesn’t Trump get any credit for this? Trump talked tough here and Kim saw the light. Now Trump is talking tough to the Mad Mullahs. Maybe they will see the light, too. They better, if they know what’s good for them.

            Trump knows how to deal with murderous dictators: by being tougher than they are. Liberals almost pass out with fright when someone talks tough to a dictator. That’s why Liberals are unsuited to handling the national defense. Their natural inclination is to appease dictators, like they have done since World War II. Is that what you want us to do with the Mad Mullahs, appease them?

          • Tom, try reading a history book before posting. The mullahs are anti US because we propped up the Shah for decades, who was an incredibly oppressive tyrant – same as we did for Pinochet and other dictators. So what if they talk a tough game? It’s idiotic to go to war with every leader who sabre rattles. Let me guess – you supported the Iraq war, I bet. What did that accomplish? A messed up country, thousands of lives lost, $2T in spending, and a situation only marginally better than before, and in many ways worse.

          • Chris

            Try living in the present. We have a lot to learn from the past, but have we really learned anything?

            Trump rolls up with a completely new dynamic to international relations, and after generations of the same old shit, he says enough is enough. So far all we have done is bomb the bejesus out of each other, for what?

            What’s the problem? So far, he’s done nothing but make peace, and business. He couldn’t do much more damage than previous presidents, even with a nuclear strike, which we know he’s not going to do. Well, at least not until a rouge state led by a whacko hits the button, then there’s no problem because even Russia and China will back him because they could be next.

            So he strongarms N. Korea and Iran to the negotiating table. The world has spent the last 50 years not getting them to the negotiating table and look where it’s got us.

            I liked the thought of Trump as POTUS no more than you did when he was running. I was only slightly relieved when Clinton failed but was concerned that Trump was the best of a bad lot.

            But if nothing else, he has done what no other western leader has, in my experience done, which is to begin to tick off every one of his manifesto promises systematically. That’s a big deal for me and what convinced me he is the genuine article.

            He could yet fail badly, but most western leaders start from a position of failure, and inevitably, just get worse.

            And in two, or perhaps six years time, I’ll hold up my hands and say I was wrong, if he screws up. Will you do the same, assuming he’s successful?

          • As usual, MarkW misstates and tries to get away with it. Trump U SETTLED with former students for $25M, rather than have their case go to court.

            Trump claimed that he never settles lawsuits as he knows he’ll win, then he settled this one right before it went to trial.

          • Picking fights where none exist, and you mention Iran as an example?
            “Stuck on stupid” comes to mind. Iran is at war with the US and its allues across the middle east.
            Soros is a convicted criminal.
            Trump only is in your mind.

          • Hunter, please point out where Iran formally declared war on the US. I don’t mean sabre rattling speeches, I mean an actual declaration of war.

  3. In my neck of the woods the most difficult problem facing indigenous people is the fact that their Tribal Council is evenly split on whether to invest $55 million in a new waterfront resort hotel in close proximity to one of their casinos.

    I’m sure Soros and his ilk would never think of pointing out that economic development has been a boon for many native peoples. I recently had the chance to hang out at their tribal “wellness” facility, staffed with a full time dentist, a full time nurse practitioner, a health and fitness counselor with a well equipped exercise facility, and about 10 other staff members. If you are a tribal member the services are 100% free, and they will even arrange transportation.

    • Mark from the Midwest

      “If you are a tribal member the services are 100% free, and they will even arrange transportation.”

      Welcome to the UK.

        • bonbon

          You imagine that was a clever comment?

          Expand please, what parts of the NHS are for sale?

          • Jeremy Hunt, the new Foreign Secretary, was long-standing minister for health, best known as the architect of privatization for the NHS, author of “The Plan”, which calls for taxing everyone into “personal health service accounts,” to be spent on finding a private doctor, with only those without any funds getting government support. This is what May is planning to spend 20 billion pounds on at NHS — not improving health care. (Hunt has no experience in foreign affairs).
            So one May get healthcare.
            Sounds like Obama’s Ezekiel Rahm was over advising.

          • bonbon

            Sorry, but I’m struggling to make sense of your post, probably my fault.

            Hunt the cnut was a nonentity before entering politics. He was a failed management consultant (two years from memory) a language teacher overseas after that, the he tried to sell marmalade to the Japanese. I mean, I’m all for personal enterprise and the benefits of failure and all that, but marmalade to Japan? Was he serious?

            Then he lucked into a business with his mate (as I did many years ago) sold it for a bundle (which I didn’t) and a political future emerged before his very eyes (I had to find a proper job thankfully).

            During that time, with no meaningful business experience, or governmental credentials, he wrote a book, or was at least credited with writing it, about privatising the NHS.

            Firstly, I’m utterly astonished he wrote the book, secondly I’m utterly astonished the book was taken seriously considering his lack of experience, thirdly I’m astonished he became an MP with his lack of experience and credibility, fourthly I’m astonished he became a cabinet minister for the same reasons, fifthly I’m astonished he survived the doctors strike (the first in 50 years or so) sixthly, I’m astonished he’s progressed to foreign secretary despite his lack of credentials and demonstration of previous failures, and seventhly, I believe he’s being groomed for PM by a insidious group of treacherous individuals as yet unidentified by me, although I’m certain they are well known to the establishment.

            In the meantime, from personal experience (my wife is a senior healthcare academic and head of department at a prominent UK university, with her portfolio the most profitable of any faculty) Hunt has comprehensively fucked the NHS with his ideological concept of, amongst others, universities being forced to tender for student placements with hospitals.

            I can’t begin to explain to you how counter productive that single operational change is within the NHS because I probably don’t have enough space on this blog to do so however, be assured that the next 5 – 10 years of Nurse education will be one of the biggest trauma’s the NHS has ever experienced, because of Hunt.

            If you are a Brit, please, whatever you do, make sure you do what you can to make sure this man is not installed as head of the Conservative party, and god forbid, PM.

            Having said all that. The farming out of specialist NHS areas to the private sector has been a roaring success (established long before Hunt who has merely sought to stamp his discreditable authority on the organisation) not only from the financial perspective, but from patient experience. My wife has some 50 academics to supervise, but she still visits her clinical areas on a regular basis (our local hospital weekly) to ensure training standards are maintained. She see’s no meaningful difference between the private and public entities at a clinical level, but the private entities save the NHS a lot of money.

            Now, please explain to me how the NHS would be worse off if the private sector were to get involved and demonstrate clinical parity, and financial prudence the NHS has never achieved.

            If the concept of care at the point of delivery is maintained, and still paid for by the state, what does it matter who delivers it clinically providing it’s achieved efficiently?

          • Efficiency is the keyword of Obamacare architect Dr. Ezekiel Rahm (Ez-kill) the euthanasia proponent. He is well known in AMA circles. I heard he was over advising Brits on his genius. Its worth tracking down any link to Hunt. Whenever you see evidence-based medical care, efficiency, merging hospitals, Rahm is not far away. I was pointed to this :
            “Rationing Health Care: The Case Against” by John Grimley Evans, British Medical Journal, March 15, 1997)
            See “Complete Lives System in Jan. 31, 2009, the Lancet.
            Liverpool Care Pathway , “a big step forward” according to Hunt , is euthanasia. That’s the link.
            Maybe,just maybe, The Plan will be extremely bad for polls, now that Trump went after Obamacare.

          • bonbon

            Obliged for that.

            Elective euthanasia has long been a controversial subject in the UK. To the extent that I believe anyone who helps another to visit the clinic in Switzerland to legally (in Switzerland) terminate their own life there runs the risk of prosecution.

            Personally, if I’m so infirm and I want to end my life, I won’t need a clinic. However, I believe that the people who do choose the path of controversy, enduring all the pain that goes with it, to make a point that their life is their own, are incredibly courageous.

            We don’t have a choice when we enter the world, why shouldn’t we have a choice to leave it?

            Those beliefs notwithstanding, I remain on the fence about the whole subject. It’s fraught with numerous moral, legal and practical issues. I’m neither qualified nor competent enough to sit in judgement of those who want to end their own lives, nor am I sure anyone else is.

      • Excuse tribal heath care predates the UK health care system is been free and operating for before WWII. The only difference between now and then is now it not 100 % funded by the FEDS so the 5% shortfall of all government health care plans is being made up by the tribes, not so in the UK.

    • This article is not about your neck of the woods. Building a casino is just a little bit different than, for example, having tribal lands taken away, used for nickel mining for 10 years, then being left with a toxic mining site.

      • Chris

        It was a light hearted comment [snip].

        Don’t lecture me on having lands taken away. I’m a Scot, our ancestral lands and sea’s have been exploited for longer that the indigenous tribes of America.

        We just happened to embrace the opportunity and invent everything worth inventing. Ever wonder why your road materials are referred to a tarmacadam? Invented by a Scot. Penicillin? A Scot. TV? A Scot. Telephone? A Scot. Even the term ‘the whole nine yards’ refers to the amount of cloth it takes to make the Kilt.

        It seems the indigenous Americans didn’t see the opportunity offered by change, similar to you with climate change, and were left behind, just like you.

        [Let’s avoid the name calling, and keep the discourse civil. -mod]

        • I am English. We have been invaded by Romans, Picts, Scots, Angles , Saxons, Vikings, Normans.
          Taken as slaves, treated badly as inferior.
          But then we had our time in the sun. made the most of it.

          Don’t whine, make the most of what you have. even if its a little.
          HotScot is absolutely right

          • EternalOptimist

            Yes, and as much as I’m a Scot, I’ve lived most of my life in England. There is more evidence of the attempted subjugation of a nation here, than perhaps anywhere else in the world.

            Our island is the jewel in the crown for any country bent on European, if not global domination. Militarily, socially, economically, or otherwise.

            I’m ashamed of my SNP brethren. I’m also ashamed of Brexit remainers, who refuse to stand as a nation, behind the democratic process.

          • The Bard, Shakespeare, put it better – A scepter’d Isle set in a silver’d sea. Until the Venetian Party took over (Cecils ,Howards et al), that is. Brexit is about exactly that. Robert Burns got it right – The best laid plans of mice and Men.

            But I wonder at the SNP – on July 1 1999 the new Scottish parliament sung this instead of God save the Queen:

            Ye see yon birkie, ca’d a lord,
            Wha struts, an’ stares, an’ a’ that;
            Tho’ hundreds worship at his word,
            He’s but a cuif for a’ that,
            For a’ that, an’ a’ that,
            His ribband, star, an’ a’ that:
            The man o’ independent mind
            He looks an’ laughs at a’ that.

            What has happened?

          • EternalO

            What I find odd is that the people in GB came from Ireland, invaded and settled the place early in the Bronze Age. And look what happened when some of them went home to Ireland in the 1600’s! Chaos and rejection!

            Complain, complain, complain. In Southern Africa the Bantu peoples complain about the Europeans taking land they took “fair and square” from the Khoi/San. Europeans complain about an invasion by Easterners when they arrived from India not that long ago. And look how they treat their late arrival Gypsy cousins! Is that how we treat family?

            The “First Nations” arrived in North America to displace the Clovis and Denisovan peoples. My brother attended a community meeting in Alberta once at which a Stetson-wearing, large belt-buckeled man stood to declare that, “The only problem we have is all these damn foreigners coming in and taking over everything. Our problems would disappear of we did something about all these damn foreigners,” and sat down.

            The next to rise was a First Nations Albertan who said, “I want to agree with the former speaker. We have had this problem for 400 years!”

            Yeah, well, the Denisovans had that problem for more than 10,000 years, and look what happened to them. I don’t see that the miscegenized English deserve any special condemnation or protection for wandering around their island homes. Not only are they no worse or better than anyone else, we are all one human family in the first place.

        • Actually ‘the whole nine yards’ refers to the combined length of the machine gun ammo belts in a Spitfire. “I gave him the whole nine yards” means that “I shot at him until I ran out of ammo”.

          • fthoma

            Perhaps a common popularisation, but the same was largely true of the first world war when ammunition belts were of a similar length.

            But the Scot’s claims to the term go back much further in time and has as much credibility.

            The grandest Kilts of the wealthiest would have been ‘the whole nine yards’ but those who couldn’t afford such finery were restricted to less of the valuable cloth.

        • Hotscot – my comment was not aimed at you, [snip]. Learn how indenting works. I was responding to Mark from the Midwest, not you.

          “It seems the indigenous Americans didn’t see the opportunity offered by change, similar to you with climate change, and were left behind, just like you.”

          Funny comment given that Bell emigrated to Canada, and then the US, where he invented the telephone. It looks like it is Scotland that was left behind – pretty much all your inventors moved away from Scotland before they came up with their inventions. If Scotland is such an amazing place for economic opportunity, why does everyone leave? “Scots are also more likely to leave their homeland and settle elsewhere than any other English-speaking peoples.”

          [Personal insults are neither necessary, nor welcome. Keep it civil please. -mod]

          • True, but it is the indomitable spirit of the Scots, I suspect ingrained by their culture, which lead to this phenomena.
            (disclosure statement: I am mostly Scottish).
            I’ve had similar conversations with my mother who complains that her sons never come to visit her. I’ve quipped back its because were Scots. She lamented its true as here father never retuned to Scotland even to visit when he had opportunity.
            I’ve always attributed it to the strong independence and high capability of Scotland’s sons and daughters.

          • Chris

            Learn the common courtesy of addressing someone by name, then I’ll consider learning indenting, fool.

            The Scot’s are one of the worlds great adventurers. Whether you appreciate it or not, and you obviously don’t, we Scot’s are proud of our heritage and no matter where we live, we are still Scottish. Even the article you link to says that.

            The Scottish explorer Livingstone died in Africa, seeking to end slavery. Does that make him any less a Scot?

            “pretty much all your inventors moved away from Scotland before they came up with their inventions.”

            Yes, to educate Luddites like you. There’s no point in educating the educated, we had to go further afield to meet people like you to convince you there is more to the world than your parochial perspective.

            The messages were obviously lost on you.

          • Canada was built mostly by scots. the railway which made Canada would not exist if not for scotsman. ( I am not one but wish I had half their drive and stamina}

          • cjw

            I think your comment allows you to wear the Kilt.

            I should really check with Kilt central, but hell, it was good enough for me.

            You are duly anointed.


          • Scotland is so great the world is full of Scots who left and found somewhere else to live.

            “The great thing about Glasgow is that if there’s a nuclear attack it’ll look exactly the same afterwards.

            Billy Connolly.

          • Leo Smith

            I believe Billy also said that if the world were to have an enema, it would be administered in Adelaide (Australia).

          • HotScot said: “Yes, to educate Luddites like you. There’s no point in educating the educated, we had to go further afield to meet people like you to convince you there is more to the world than your parochial perspective.”

            No, they moved away for economic opportunity. It has nothing to do with educating the educated. Scotland is a great country, some of my closest friends are Scots. They moved away for economic opportunity (though things are somewhat better now with North Sea oil).

          • Chris,
            You should consider quitting before you get further behind.
            Your fully displayed TDS is not making you look wise.

          • Chris

            Livingstone didn’t move away for economic opportunities.

            But you judge the rest of Scotland on a few of your mates. Have you ever lived there?

          • Chris

            If you haven’t lived there then, as usual, you rely on anecdotal evidence.

            People move for economic opportunity because the Scots are possibly more adventurous by nature than others. We had the best education in the world until not too many years ago, that opened people’s minds not only to economic, but social inquiry.

            And of course, never having lived there, you simply accept the weather is “crap”. Whilst I can tell you categorically, that is an urban myth you have swallowed hook line and sinker. Scotland is blessed with rainfall which is why it’s one of the most beautiful and lush countries on the planet. Yet I spent a week in the Campsie hills a month ago when temperatures were at a perfect 25C. I spent my youth in those hills, in summer we were sliding down waterfalls in our trunks, in the winter sliding down hills on ski’s. We water ski’d on Loch Lomond almost every summer weekend, we fished the same waters come rain hail or shine and we spent winters curling on pristine Lochs, far from the popular tourist resorts.

            So how dare you take another’s word, for a common misconception that Scotland’s weather is “crap” and announce it on a public forum. Like everything else you have an opinion on, it’s not from your experience, it’s from second hand stories from others.

            You revel in the misery of others and expect the rest of us to join you in your self flagellating guilt trip because you claim you know what you’re talking about, when nothing could be further from the truth. You have no experience of Scotland, as you probably have no experience of the native Americans, yet you embark on a pilgrimage of Social Justice to make you feel good.

            And you might want to actually read your link which has more about immigration into Scotland than emigration from it. If the damn weather is so bad, why were there so many Italian immigrants?

          • MOD

            No problem for me, I’ll give as good as I get. I responded in kind and I hope you’ll reinstate his insult rather than delete mine as well, just for the sake of equity. The term “fool” isn’t so bad.

        • You’re right.
          I often hear people say ‘Oh he, or she, was lucky.
          Generally it has little to do with luck but the act of simply taking advantage of whatever opportunity presents itself.

      • Chris the reality is the native people of the Americas, were totally devastated the minute they shook hands with the travelers from Europe 80% died in the next 200 years and it was not done knowingly, it was the pathogens transferred to them from the Europeans of which no one at that time had any concept of. The same was true for Europe, 40 to 60% of all Europeans died from the plague, it was introduced from the contact with the far east, somehow a nickel mine is a simple clean up compared to either of those events. Or even what happen after Jamestown was settled. All of it was bloody and a lot of people died. Don’t look to Europe or Europe as some great place. Until WWII and the US set up permeant basses after WWII, the European major powers had fought a war against each other every twenty years, the reason you don’t know about is you weren’t taught it and the major powers keep changing. I would assume much the same for the Americas in prehistory the only difference we don’t know much about it. What we do know the progressive tribes in advance of white man march across the continent, subjected all they could, you only have to look at the Chippewa and the Sioux to understand that. The Sioux were originally in Minnesota, they moved onto the plains with horses after the Chippewa basically force them out of Minnesota, the Sioux ruled the plains for two to three generations killing and enslaving all the conquered.

        • Mark, bringing up historical plagues or the spread of illnesses has nothing to do with governments or corporate interests sanctioning killings of indigenous landholders. Unless your main point is “people die for various reasons” – which is not much of a point.

        • Because Europeans had lived long in proximity to livestock, 400 disease immunities hit the Amerinds hard. However the trade off was Syphilis – King Henry VIII went quite mad with it (Zorzi wound him up). How many other people in power went that way? The Congress of Vienna spread it like a plague.

  4. …but killing white farmers in South Africa is so like today….

    How to lie with statistics…
    South Africa is bragging that less white farmers were killed last year….
    ….over 1/2 million white farmers left the country

  5. It’s called imperialism. It’s been going on since tribes were formed. It’s not constrained to human activity either. It’s practiced by all sorts of natural “colonies” of critters from ants to wolves.
    There are numerous proximal causes, but the underlying condition is: “You have something we want, and we are going to take it.”

  6. I’d feel better if they were targeting Greenpeace, Tides, Leadnow, etc. (I don’t advocate such, but still better than killing poor people protecting their land)
    Also – it wouldn’t surprise me if in some cases the above organizations set up the people killed deliberately to promote the cause.

  7. Just more propaganda. Still, communist/socialist/totalitarian propaganda experts around the world smack their foreheads & say “why didn’t we think of that?” Then they break out a can of V8…..

  8. Fighting the US’ descent into kieptocracy

    There is kleptocracy and then there’s garden variety corruption. There’s a big difference.

    The folks who accuse America of descending into kleptocracy have no faith in democracy or maybe they want to get rid of democracy. They think the people can’t be trusted with the reins of government. They think they are more enlightened. If they permanently seize the levers of power, then we are surely headed for kleptocracy and worse.

    The Marxists just knew that they were way smarter than the Russian peasants …

    • Bob,

      Crony capitalism, fascism, Chinese Communism, communism in general all have as an end product increase in the power and wealth of those in charge. We have our share of crony capitalism here in the US of A. Reducing taxes gives those in power here less money with which to buy votes, of course they can still simply print it and that needs to be addressed. The Romans started off with gold currency then silver and finally clay coins on their way down the drain. Today’s real currency backer is nuclear weapons and overall military power and we still have the most and best. People who compare our debt to other countries do not understand this. Our money and our language, English American style, are preferred because of our military might, period. Look at history. However, reducing the impact of government upon our society requires reducing the amount of money avaiable to government to buy votes and give out favors.

      • If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.

        –James Madison, Federalist #51

    • What do you call people seizing the reins of power by force to save the country from those who are seizing what they want by force?

      “Two legs, bad. Four legs, good.” Unless you can’t see any difference to bleat about.

  9. More than 200 environmental activists were murdered last year as government-sponsored killings


    We need to give governments more power.

    I think they skipped a few steps in there.

    • That is tame compared to the leftist they murdered 200,000,000 people in the twenty century though their leftist governments, and then people us classic liberals/conservative who question government power are condemned for resisting the lefts progressive movements! Yet as time goes by the lefts useful idiots never learn, they to often learn of their mistakes as the bullet from their governments guns penetrate their thick skulls, but alas it to late for them and far to many others.

      • Once again, your point has nothing to do with what was referred to in the article. More deflection.

  10. According the left, billionaires trying to influence politics is the greatest threat to democracy that has ever been discovered.
    Unless the billionaire is supporting left wing candidates, then there is no problem with it.

    • They hate the “1%” but love the “0.1%”?

      (Why is that so many billionaires that support the left (American socialism) are still billionaires?
      Shouldn’t they have voluntarily redistributed their own wealth to the people by now? … If they really believed in what they fund.)

        • Mods.
          I just noticed comments I made over an hour ago are still open for me to edit.
          That doesn’t seem right.
          Just a “heads up”.

        • I’ve noticed the same thing. It used to be that the edit function was only available for about 15 minutes. I also presumed that a post wouldn’t show up for others until after the edit option expired.

          What I do now is add “EDIT: ” prior to any changes I make after more than a few minutes have passed.

          • Honest way to do it.
            But it is a problem. Some will just change what they said in response to a reply to make the reply look wrong.
            I’m surprised that the MODS haven’t addressed it or at least replied.

            I think I’ll just throw in a couple of words that usually get their attention.
            ANTHONY WUWT

        • It seems the “Edit” issue has been addressed.
          Without getting into details, when MarkW replied he only saw, “They hate the “1%” but love the “0.1%”.”
          (Just trying to be fair to MarkW.)

      • Citizens Unuted, where conservatives finally got the same free speech as unions and other left wing organizations.
        Being against Citizens United is to be against freedom of speech.

        • Conservatives have always had the same free speech rights. CU give corporations the ability to buy elections. If you want a world where corporations control everything, then you will support CU.

      • Why is it bad for people to support the candidate of their choice?

        Like most leftist, Chris wants to limit political action to those who are like him.

          • No it was not, it was about groups of people getting together and pooling their money to fight whom ever. You corporation argument was lost in the early 1900s. that when the Supreme court ruled that corporations had the same right as you and I, if you limit corporations you are limiting you and I. Only non educated useful idiots think otherwise.

          • False, please read before posting. Hahaha – “groups of people”. There’s a sucker born every minute – PT Barnum was absolutely correct.

  11. Amazing – the article makes zero mention of the US, zero mention of Trump, zero mention of climate change. Yet Middleton makes those his headline. Why do you choose to create a controversy where none exists?

    The issue of corporations taking land from indigenous groups around the world has been going on for decades. The issue of corporations taking land, then using it for mining, then not carrying out remediation, are well documented in third world countries such as the Philippines and Brazil.

    You then try to make the ridiculous assertion that because the words “environmental activist” are used, it must be referring to the US and Greenpeace, WWF, etc rather than local activists in other countries. “And anyone with an IQ above single digits should take issue with calling these victims “environmental activists.” Well, gee, David, that’s what they are called in their own country, by their fellow citizens. Why do you have an issue with that?

    • 2017: “Deadliest year on record for environmentalists”… Because Trump? Because climate change? Or because bad journalism?

      This: ? is a “question mark.” It denotes a “question.” “Bad journalism” is obviously the correct answer.

      • So let me understand – you put a bunch of question marks regarding cause attribution, and then attack the article as bad journalism because it only highlighted the number of killings, rather than guessing at the causes? Bizarre.

        • I attacked the article because it falsely characterized the victims as “environmental activists” and the perpetrators as “big business” in a blanket fashion.

          If you had read and comprehended anything beyond the thread title, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

          • How do you know it was a false characterization? Have you gone through a list of the dead and determined what cause each was campaigning for? Land rights and environmentalist agendas often overlap.

            From the first paragraph: “government-sponsored killings linked to lucrative projects by vast agriculture multinationals” – where do you get the idea that big business is being blamed for the murders? Seems like you are the one short on comprehension. This is not a matter of whether the article is right (though I’ve no reason to believe it’s not), but of the way you interpret what you read and pass that misinterpretation to readers. When you are called out for it, your response is to insult that person’s comprehension. It’s weak and irrational.

          • How do you know it was a false characterization?

            I read the article, can do arithmetic and understand the difference between environmental activism and subsitence.

            Global Witness said it had documented 207 cases where activists were killed while trying to protect land from development…


            By far the most frequent victims of violence were indigenous peoples, who are often already maligned by governments and society.

            Why would “indigenous peoples” in Third World schist holes be willing to die to “protect land from development”?

            1) To preserve it as pristine cultural heritage sites and/or wildlife refuges.

            2) To prevent evil big businesses from making money.

            3) To protect the only way of life they know: Subsistence farming, fishung, hunting and gathering.

            Had Gorebal Witness been around in 1891, they probably would have classified Wounded Knee as a massacre of environmental activists.

          • What escapes most people is without governments help big business cannot kill anyone. Without government help big business cannot force you to do anything, it not that some people that run big business are corrupt, such corruption can lead nowhere without a corrupt government. Crony capitalism is in the same league as all corrupt forms of government, pure capitalism working a set of enforce rules(laws) where people are free to conduct business between them selves without the heavy hand of bureaucrat intervening has been the best method ever found to uplift humans. It is corruption that causes problem. Most other forms of government have built in coercion where government tries to plan the outcome, that has never been good and any time it is tried, yet it been the norm, and it what elites prefer.

          • The activists are mostly environmental. Environmental not in a CO2/AGW sense, but in the sense of protecting natural resources from 1) being taken from them and 2) being developed in a harmful and unsustainable way. A massive palm oil plantation wipes out animal species such as orang utans, plus monoculture is terrible for ecosystems, and local folks get left out of the economic pie. A mining site will destroy surrounding areas with tailings, pollute local rivers, and will not be remediated – enforcement is too weak. So why exactly are the words “environmental activist” a false characterization?

            Kristi covered the “big business” phrase. How exactly are palm plantations, large scale agriculture and mining not considered to be “big business”?

          • “So why exactly are the words “environmental activist” a false characterization?”

            because the indigenous people aren’t opposing it because of orangutans, pollution of the rivers, or other lofty environmental reasons, they’re opposing it because it’s disrupting their lives/livelyhoods/homes and leaving them “out of the economic pie”. It’s entirely for their own interests not in the interest of “the environment”. You see the poor of the third world generally have their own basic needs (like food and shelter) to worry about, it’s only those of us privileged to live our lives in the first world, where our needs and desires are easily met, that have time to worry about loftier ideals such as the environment.

          • Yes Chris, What you say is false. Glad we are in agreement with that. The article you just posted has nothing to say or do with indigenous peoples, which was what was being discussed. Typical leftist, lie and change the subject.

        • 1) The same reason that AFP and/or Soros (Global Witness) put this in their headline:

          “Record 207 environmental activists killed last year”

          2) Because Global Witless is all about Trump and climate change.

          • The AFP article was about a Gorebal Witless study. The AFP article falsely characterized the indigenous people dying to protect their own land as environmental activists fighting big business. I don’t know if the falsehood was knowingly repeated by AFP or if they were just spoon-fed lies by Gorebal Witless. However, at some point, the press has an obligation to check the facts.

          • Specifically what is false about that? a) they are trying to protect their land b) that can be called an activist, protester, claimant

            Second, it is almost always a big company that is involved. Mining, palm oil, soybeans. Big companies have the $ to hire muscle to force the local villagers off, they have the money to bribe govt officials to turn a blind eye. So specifically what is inaccurate?

        • Because it was fun and gave you & Chris something to gripe about… and because Gorebal Witless is all about Trump & climate change.

    • I agree with Chris. This is truly a bizarre article. Except this is less a creation of controversy than propagating popular prop’ganda (exemplified by striking out the word “terrorism” in association with Greenpeace, etc., but still leaving it in the article).

      Then there is the accusation of “enviromarxism” toward groups who engage in hideous activities like “promoting civil rights, social justice and education… grassroots efforts to strengthen lower-income neighborhoods… work to build vibrant and tolerant democracies.” I suppose that’s because the Soros family is against countries like Poland and Hungary slipping into anti-semitism, white supremism and radical xenophobia, with a sizable fascist contingent. “Tolerant democracies” are not what the far-right wants.

      From that to oil discoveries in Equatorial Guinea?! The country is a perfect example of the kind of kleptocracy that some skeptics are so ready to accuse greens of funding. What makes David think that oil dollars are any less likely to fuel corruption?

      “In October, [Equatorial Guinea] President Obiang’s eldest son, Teodorin, was convicted by a French court of embezzling more than €100 million (US$119 million) in state funds to purchase a Parisian mansion, exotic sports cars, and luxury goods. In an apparent attempt to shield him from accountability, Obiang appointed Teodorin vice president in 2016, shortly after French prosecutors concluded their investigation. Another money-laundering prosecution implicating government officials is making its way through the Spanish courts, and Swiss authorities started investigating Teodorin for alleged money-laundering activities in 2016.”

      “According to the United Nations 2016 Human Development Report, the country had a per capita gross national income of $21,517 in 2015, the highest in Africa and more than six times the regional average.

      “Despite this, Equatorial Guinea ranks 135 out of 188 countries in the Human Development Index that measures social and economic development…

      “In 2016, 42 percent of primary school age children were not registered as students, the seventh highest proportion in the world, according to UNICEF. Only half of children who begin primary school complete it. And according to the 2011 survey, about half the population lacks access to clean water and 26 percent of children exhibited stunted growth, a sign of malnutrition. Equatorial Guinea has among the world’s lowest vaccination rates; 25 percent of children received no vaccinations at all, according to the 2011 survey.”

      Where is the oil wealth going? Any guesses?

      How ironic that so many skeptics accuse environmentalists of being responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people and keeping millions in poverty by hindering access to affordable energy, while at the same time attacking groups that push for transparency in the way money is handled by fossil fuel industries and their governmental partners in developing countries.

      • Agreed. And what does your sensible retort get you here on WUWT? A down vote. Folks here call out climate scientists for being corrupt, without any evidence of climate scientists making substantial money off climate change research, and then yawn when evidence is presented about massive corruption in Africa, Central America and South America relating to fossil fuel exploration (and of course also mining, timber and agricultural development).

        • chris,

          let us test your theory.

          give us a sensible retort.

          if you can’t come up with one of your own, you can quote somebody else.

          (remember it has to be sensible … no weird rants, insults, innuendo, or illogical crap)

          • Don, how were my comments weird or insulting? This entire post is nonsensical. The article referenced makes zero mention of Trump – Middleton brings in Trump. He then jumps into Soros diatribe, which is completely unrelated to the article about killings. It’s logically incoherent.

          • I don’t know what you mean by “logically incoherent”. What you said up until then made sense, as your opinion, but it seems that you feel you need to cap it with some over the top crap.

            I recognize your poor style because I see it in my own … see my above comment … and see this one as example.

          • Logical incoherence is posting the AFP article with headlines about Trump. Trump is mentioned nowhere in the AFP article, nor is climate change. Middleton then follows it with a Global Witness article, and attacks Soros.

            If you read about the deaths of these activists, most are killed because they tried to stop corporations, who buy off governments, from taking land from local villagers and turning it into palm plantations, or a mining site, etc. How is that a bad thing? It’s as if the word environmentalist is viewed so negatively on WUWT that all of their actions get criticized, even if it has nothing to do with global warming issues.

          • You left out the middle bit where I linked to Soros-funded Gorebal Witless and their obsession with Trump and climate change.

            The post was not limited to the AFP article.

            You also leave out where I wrote that these “activists” were overwhelmingly indigenous people protecting their own land from development.

          • Why can’t indigenous people be activists? Only Westerners can be activists? Only employees of WWF, Greenpeace, etc can be activists?

            Here is the definition of an activist: “a person who campaigns to bring about political or social change.”

            The indigenous people want their governments to stop condoning/approving the taking of their lands for mining or agricultural purposes. So they campaign and protest. What word better describes their work than activist?

          • Wounded Knee: The result of indigenous people trying to protect their land and way of life from government backed development.


            Standing Rock: The result of environmental activists opposing big business.


            The incidents described in the Gorebal Witless report are more analogous to Wounded Knee than Standing Rock… And there’s no mention of specific environmental activists in the AFP article, just groups of indigenous people supposedly killed by government forces or government-backed thugs.

          • “The indigenous people want their governments to stop condoning/approving the taking of their lands for mining or agricultural purposes. So they campaign and protest. What word better describes their work than activist?”

            Just like leftist in the debate over illegal immigration leave out the word “illegal” you, Chis, leave out the word “environmental” in the discussion about the articles claims about deaths of “environmental activists”. The indigenous people may be considered “activists” for their own interests, that does not make them “environmental activists” in any meaningful or coherent sense of the term.

          • Wrong, the word environmental is correct as many of the sites are used for mining. What exactly do you call mining tailings being dumped into a river? A minor inconvenience?

          • Yes, you are wrong. The word environmental to describe the indigenous populace is not appropriate for all the reasons already discussed. Please go back and reread with understanding this time.

        • Sure – a simple, entirely factual, one-sentence comment can get a down vote simply because people recognize the name and think of past statements.

          It’s the new moral relativism: corruption is in the eye of the beholder.

          • Kristi, your opinion regarding what’s “factual” is highly biased towards anything you agree with.

          • If he doesn’t know it’s because you failed to communicate what you were referring to. That failure is your fault not his for not being able to read your mind. that’s a fact.

          • HotScot – Given how incoherent most of your posts are, I’m not losing any sleep over your criticism.

          • In the world of your average leftist, coherent is indistinguishable from “I agree with it”.

          • Chris

            Yet you don’t include yourself, despite posting comments about Scotland, of which you have no experience. At worst I might be considered incoherent. You, on the other hand, operate from a world of fantasy.

          • Saying Scotland has poor weather is not fantasy. My Scottish friends told me that – do you think they lied for some reason? It’s also gorgeous, in part because of that wet weather. I’m from Seattle. Seattle has crap weather for 9 months a year. Unlike you, I’m not insulted in the slightest if someone says that, and they don’t have to have visited Seattle. Seattle has that reputation and that reality. So what? It’s no big deal. Like Scotland, it’s also why Seattle is lush and green.

            Regarding the economy, I need to travel there to understand it, rather than reading about it? Really? There are statistics called GDP, GDP growth, GDP per capita, average wage, etc. Based on those, Scotland is doing decent but not great.

          • Chris

            You live your experiences vicariously. Your opinions are formed anecdotally. You are a keyboard SJW with no investment in the realities of life. You merely trawl the internet looking for the evidence of others to support your idealogical perception of what should or shouldn’t represent an ideal life.

            You have no idea what makes Scotland “gorgeous” because you have never lived there. Do I think your Scottish friends (plural?) lied? Frankly, I don’t believe they exist, they are a figment of your online persona. Why would they move from Scotland’s “crap” weather to Seattle’s “crap” weather? And if they exist and don’t live in Seattle I don’t believe for a moment you scurried around polling them for opinions on Scottish weather.

            Nor do I believe for a moment you’re qualified to judge any country at an economic level based on GDP or any other financial metric. Nevertheless, you trawl the internet (again) for numbers but can’t possibly understand the political or social implications because, guess what? You have never lived there.

          • HotScot – I beg of you, please take a course in English comprehension before posting again. I said I’m from Seattle. Do you understand the difference between the words “from” and “live in”?

            I live in Singapore. Google it on a map, you’ll find that it is in Asia, quite far from Seattle. Most European and American companies put their SE Asian HQ there, and so they have lots of expats living there, including many Scots. Got it?

          • Chris

            “from” is a single word.

            “live in” are two words.

            I think that’s about as plainly as I can put it without thoroughly confusing you.

            You might consider that your grammar is so awful it’s barely comprehensible. However, self analysis isn’t one of your better qualities.

            Kindly address your own grammatical failings before provoking me on the subject.

            “Most European and American companies put their SE Asian HQ there……”

            That would be…….’put their SE Asian HQ’s there’. HQ’s being the plural of HQ, HQ being the abbreviation for Head Quarter, or in the plural, Head Quarters. And I think ‘locate’ rather than “put” would be a more appropriate term. “put” sounds like they dropped them from orbit.

            It’s also an interesting claim, any evidence for it, or is it just another example of your cavalier use of the English language?

            Is your contention also, that lots of Scot’s living in Singapore makes your claims about the country any less anecdotal? I guess that would be a bit like the 97% concencus; the more people who agree, irrespective of their perspective, the more certain the conclusion. Is that the thrust of your argument Chris?

            And I think at this point, we should both drop the comprehension and grammatical debate. It’s a silly, pointless, point scoring exercise. Neither of us are perfect in either respect, and nobody’s interested. Believe it or not, we don’t have an audience here as everyone else has moved on.

          • Hotscot focuses on grammar to the exclusion of the main points being discussed. That’s because he was last in Asia in the 1970s, has never been to SE Asia, or at best has not been to SE Asia in decades. So his lecture to someone who has lived in SE Asia for 20 years and who travels regularly to the countries referenced in this report is rather disingenous. A retired guy sitting in (London?) sees fit to lecture others about getting out and experiencing the world so as to have first hand knowledge – when his “first hand” knowledge of Asia is 40 years old.

          • Chris

            You announce this as though anyone else is listening to us “Hotscot focuses on grammar………”

            Get with it mate. No one’s interested. Calm down.

            As for my travelling, you’re going to be mighty humiliated when you read one of my other posts because as extensively as I do travel in the far east, you still haven’t been to Scotland.

            BTW, I’m not retired, nor dare make a mockery of those who are.

          • hahaha – out of the thousands of climate scientists working globally, your evidence is pointing out that one (1) guy, who also happens to be the most famous climate scientist in the world, had a high income during one (1) year. Oh, and that was in large part because of a one time award he received. Why do you use the plural of scientists when you only found one?

          • Chris

            You blame climate change on a single cause, atmospheric CO2. What’s the difference?

          • Chris

            Forgive me then. Perhaps I was wrong.

            So just what role does CO2 play in the climate change debate, in your opinion?

          • You asked for climate scientists making substantial money off climate change research… Hansen is evidence.

          • David, I said plural, not singular. And being given an award is entirely different than making money off the research itself.

          • Kristi Silber

            David said it was “evidence”. By your own metric that’s enough to at least cast doubt on all other climate scientists. Only yours is circumstantial, at least David’s is fact, otherwise the accusation would be libellous.

          • Hansen is just evidence of climate scientists making substantial money off climate change research…

          • David Middleton

            No point David, neither of them have the slightest clue what evidence is.

          • Sure, Hotscot. So if one accountant out of thousands working in, say, Scotland, is found guilty of embezzlement, all accountants in Scotland should be suspected of embezzlement.

          • Chris

            Surprisingly, even in your mentally addled condition you’re finally able to grasp the tiniest bit of common sense.

            Everyone is under suspicion, quite rightly, more often referred to as scepticism. That’s one of the reason anyone with half a brain doesn’t pick the first contractor/professional he finds in the yellow pages and accepts his quote as given. Most of us with our feet on the planet would reasonably talk to three contractors before assessing their suitability.

            I really can’t understand why you made your last post without thinking that through. But then your comments are usually fire, aim, draw. Just like Kristi so it’s no better than I expect from you.

            However, I live in hope.

          • Wow, what a powerful insight from Hotscot. Irrelevant, unfortunately. Middleton was asked to provide evidence of climate scientists – note the s at the end, meaning plural – making lots of money off their work. He provided one (1) example, not multiple. And it was a guy who did not make the money from his salary, or a grant he skimmed, but rather an award he had no control over.

            So that’s one example, which is not really an example. It’s like saying high school English teachers are getting rich off the system when your one proof point is a teacher that received $100K for being selected Teacher of the Year.

        good thing I wasn’t holding my breath.

        you are just a one-trick pony. No depth. A foregone conclusion. Man these leftists are so boring.

        • Why is it an indication of lack of depth to agree with someone, especially since that was followed by new points and information?

          Where is the depth in your comment? Are insipid insults a sign of knowledge, reason or intellect? What have you contributed to the conversation?

          It’s not people on the right or left who are boring except to those who are so boring themselves they have no capacity to listen or learn. When someone thinks they know all about everyone in a group, they are bound to be bored by them.

          Your comment epitomizes boring.

          • Kristi Silber

            “It’s not people on the right or left who are boring except to those who are so boring themselves they have no capacity to listen or learn.”

            That would be you as you have demonstrated no ability to listen or learn despite your claims to do so.

          • You mean I’ve demonstrated no ability to learn from you. I’ll give you that. You’ve demonstrated no ability to teach me.

          • Kristi Silber

            Plenty of others have the ability to teach you on WUWT, you’re just not listening.

          • Kristi is a living reminder of the old saying: There are none so blind as those who will not see (or the similar biblical verse from Jerimiah: “Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not”)

      • Kristi Silber/Chris

        Oh for goodness sake, two of you consorting for some kind of Kumbaya gang bang.

        “The issue of corporations taking land from indigenous groups around the world has been going on for decades.”

        No, the controversy has been going on for thousands of years. Life didn’t just begin at the time of your birth, as much as you would like to believe it so.

        “You then try to make the ridiculous assertion that because the words “environmental activist” are used, it must be referring to the US and Greenpeace, WWF, etc rather than local activists in other countries.”

        No, David makes the assertion, ridiculous or otherwise, he doesn’t “try” to make it.

        The tiny number of local activist’s in these countries wouldn’t have dreamed of the convenient marketing terms organised and paid for by Greenpeace, WWF which are splashed over TV screens in the west depicting normal life in the developing world as environmentally chaotic.

        I have lived in ‘under developed’ countries and found that despite the condescension of greens, they enjoy a healthy, pleasant existence, as far as that goes without cheap abundant power. Indeed, interfering Gweilo’s, like greens, are despised in the free far east. They respect the concept of a free market economy and enjoy dealing with ‘Capitalist’s’ as it mirrors their natural entrepreneurial inclinations.

        The causes of killings are irrelevant. They are a fact of human existence. Look at the murder rates in civilised western countries. Judging by our wealth and conditions relative to those in developing countries, violence should have been eradicated, but it’s not.

        And Kristi

        You spelt propaganda incorrectly. “prop’ganda” isn’t a word I recognise. Some sort of slang unique to you perhaps?

        And you dissect David’s article, pedantic piece, by pedantic piece yet fail to acknowledge that green policies are killing 120,000,000 people over the next 32 years.

        You have no understanding of what the ‘far right’ want’s because you have bought into the rhetoric of Jack booted skinheads waving nazi flags whilst smashing shop windows.

        I am as far right as anyone can get. I deplore violence and am a member of the UK Libertarian Party, a legitimate far right, political group that promotes freedom of speech, democracy, small government, free trade and the rule of law.

        The far right you promote are a product of your own left wing extremism, Fascism. A concept crystallised by Mussolini who was kicked out of the left after many years, into the right who rejected him in very short order, and then went on to develop a regime that Hitler himself admired.

        Where do you both imagine your ability to participate in this blog comes from? The far left wing policies of China and N. Korea who, variously, wont allow internet access for the masses, or censor access to it. Or the freedom of the right? America, the UK, France, Canada, Australia and every other country that fought two world wars to ensure your ability to freely make comment on a blog that would be banned in a left wing environment.

        I’m fortunate to be an acquaintance of one of the wealthiest men in the UK. I’m not a backslapping, beer drinking mate, but what I can tell you is that, amongst the most common traits of wealthy people is the desire to avoid political matters like the plague. There are few exceptions, of course, but in the main, they perceive money, and the value of a fair trade which satisfies both parties, as the most equitable way forward for a civilised society.

        Your income and pensions will be underwritten by my acquaintance and his wealthy colleagues. Much of their investment to achieve that will be in fossil fuels, because that’s part of a fair mix of their portfolio.

        If investment in developing economise were a profitable endeavour, these risk takers would be the first in line. But they’re not, because political interference makes the investments far too risky.

        So, money isn’t the problem, despite you two being far to quick to point to it as the culprit, a bit like CO2. Politics is the problem.

        Therefore, smaller politics means less government interference, less corruption and less inappropriate advice to perpetuate conflict, to perpetuate the corruption you blame on money.

        What was the first income tax introduced for? So Britain could fight Napoleon. Income tax was a subsidiary tax to wage war.

        “In October, [Equatorial Guinea] President Obiang’s eldest son, Teodorin, was convicted by a French court of embezzling more than €100 million (US$119 million) in state funds to purchase a Parisian mansion, exotic sports cars, and luxury goods.”

        Funny that, a political expedient rather than a business expedient. I suspect Trump would have, metaphorically, hung him up by his toes for cheating him of his well earned profits. I’ll bet Soros would be equally unforgiving.

        “Where is the oil wealth going? Any guesses?”

        I have mentioned this before, most of it into your greedy little pensions, you hypocritical trolls.

        • Another meandering, mind numbing post by Hot Scot. Oil wealth has nothing to do with pensions unless the pension fund is invested into oil stocks. And almost no one in 2018 has a pension in America (it’s less than 20% of private sector employees) – try to keep up.

          • “And almost no one in 2018 has a pension in America (it’s less than 20% of private sector employees)”

            20% is a quite a bit more than “no one”, that’s 1 in 5 right there. And that’s just the private sector, in the public sector, that number is much higher (somewhere around 88% according to wikipedia) so not even close to “almost no one”.

          • Even if it was 1 in 10 that would still a) be considerably more than “almost no-one” and b) still ignoring the public section where it’s 8 in 10 so again no where close to “almost no-one”.

        • “…fail to acknowledge that green policies are killing 120,000,000 people over the next 32 years.”

          “You have no understanding of what the ‘far right’ want’s”
          Well, that might be true if I hadn’t spent hundreds of hours discussing it with my Trumpist conservative best friend, who is good, brilliant, honest and chock full of integrity. Maybe that’s why I’ve learned so much from him and don’t learn squat from you.

          • Kristi Silber

            ““…fail to acknowledge that green policies are killing 120,000,000 people over the next 32 years.”

            There you go. An utter refusal to learn. The WHO states it, but you don’t believe it. Because you have some insider knowledge unique to you perhaps? Don’t keep it to yourself though, please enlighten us with your profound insight into WHO’s feeble attempt to mislead us all with the ludicrous claim that 120M people will die by 2050 of conditions derived from smoke inhalation because they have no electricity.

            I mean, the reasons for, and the conditions contributing to those deaths are clearly expressed on their web site, as you well know. So perhaps you have an expose that cast’s doubt on the entire WHO.

      • Chris’s comment has now been “peer-reviewed”.
        The opinion is settled.
        No need for further thought.

      • “Social justice’ is the bread and butter of Marxism.

        Without the development of Equitorial Guinea’s oil resources, there would be no possibility for it to have achieved the highest per capita GDP in Africa and none of these things would be happening:





        Equitorial Guinea was a poor, corrupt nation before the development of its hydrocarbon resources. Now, it has an opportunity and pathway to advance out of the Third World. However, it’s up to Equitorial Guinea to make that advance.

        If it was left up to Enviromarxist terrorist organizations like Gorebal Witless, Equitorial Guinea would be denied that opportunity un the name of social justice.

          • Equitoral Guinea has an avenue to leave the Third World. They didn’t have that avenue without the development of their hydrocarbon resources. In order to take that avenue, they have to reduce the corruption. That’s something they have to do on their own.

            ExxonMobil opened the avenue, in pursuit of profits. Gorebal Witless would close the avenue, in pursuit of social justice.

          • Real justice or fake (social) justice?

            You need a functioning civil society and rule of law to have real justice. The development of Equitorial Guinea’s hydrocarbon resources provides them with a motive and means to develop a civil society and rule of law. Gorebal Witless just provides platitudes and would deny Equitorial Guinea the means to advance from the Third World because… social justice.

          • Nice hand waving avoidance, David. EG is one of the most corrupt countries on earth. The chances of them cleaning up on their own is less than 1%. It hasn’t happened yet, why on earth do you think a lucrative oil contract is going to persuade them to change? It will have the opposite effect – another piggy bank to raid for money.

          • Chris

            As usual, [Snip. Even indirect insults are prohibited. Discuss without resorting to making it personal. -mod]

          • Mod

            Sorry, but that’s pathetic. Chris makes it personal by insulting my country, but that’s OK, is it?

            Moderation on this site has become overbearing since the change over.

            [We’re certainly not trying to be overbearing, but rather are trying to keep discussions civil. Discuss the idea, but leave personal invectives out…even mild ones tend to add up and suppress conversation. That’s not what we’re about. Thanks for being a valued and consistent commenter, though, and we hope you continue. -mods]

          • Mod

            See my comment below.

            If you wish to bureaucratise the blog, then you must set out precise guidelines on what is, and isn’t an insult; and precisely what expressions are and aren’t acceptable. You also need to define precisely what is, and isn’t, an indirect insult.

            One contributor, addressing me as “Hotspot”, might be acceptable to you, but offensive to me. Yet you didn’t snip it (them). Nor can it be considered a genuine error as it’s been expressed a number of times and ‘c’ and ‘p’ are nowhere near each other on a querty keyboard. Personally, I find the pathetic attempt at an insult highly amusing, but others might not.

            I might consider Chris referring to Scottish weather as “crap” hugely derogatory of my homeland (which, actually I do) but I’ll deal with Chris on the subject, thankfully you didn’t intervene, but doesn’t that simply demonstrate your prejudice?

            So I guess your arbitrary decision on the matter is exactly what most on this site object to, arbitrary imposition of climate change hysteria.

            If Chris and I want to call each other fools, or idiots, we’re grown ups, I’m sure we’ve each been called worse. We either continue to spiral down the path of irrelevance, at which point everyone else disengages, or one, or both of us disengages and the discussion is finished.

            Please don’t turn the blog into what we all despise: a fortress of political correctness with all of us tippy toeing around the central issues for fear of offending MOD’s presenting their personal values for examination.


          • It just affords them the opportunity. Gorebal Witless would deny them the opportunity.

            EG doesn’t have a “lucrative oil contract,” XOM does. EG has the oil. As part of the deal with XOM, EG’s national oil company has a working interest in the various projects. EG had to build a national oil company from scratch.

            The development requires infrastructure. Building a national oil company and the infrastructure from scratch created opportunities for education and jobs for many Equitorial Guineans, that didn’t exist 20 years ago. About 90% of XOM workers in Africa are citizens of the African countries in which the projects are located. ExxonMobil probably does more to improve the lives of Africans than the the UN and other sources of foreign aid. And it does far more than frauds like Gorebal Witless will ever do.

            July 2013
            In Africa, Exxon Mobil looks for ways to do good while doing business


            Exxon Mobil is one of the largest foreign investors in Africa. Over the last five years, it has committed more than $24 billion to energy exploration and development here.

            Those efforts are mainly focused in Nigeria, Angola and Equatorial Guinea. Exxon Mobil also is active in a growing number of other African countries. In Tanzania, a relative newcomer to energy development, Exxon Mobil is partnering with Statoil of Norway to look for natural gas off the Indian Ocean coast.

            Such business spending often is enough to fuel extraordinary growth for the host countries.

            As one Exxon Mobil executive wrote last year, the oil and gas industry’s overall investments in resource-rich countries “tend to dwarf the economic impact of bilateral foreign aid or humanitarian projects.”


            Exxon Mobil’s leaders have long grappled with how deeply they should get involved in Africa’s affairs beyond doing business here. A company executive told The Wall Street Journal in 2005, “We are not the Red Cross.”
            Still, like other companies, Exxon Mobil has made charitable efforts — to fight disease, build schools and assist women — part of its business equation on the continent. The company’s community giving totaled $256 million worldwide last year. About $44 million went to Africa and the Middle East.

            “We feel a responsibility to partner with local communities,” said Suzanne McCarron, president of the Exxon Mobil Foundation, the company’s charitable arm.

            That’s particularly true in Africa, she said, “to ensure they are experiencing the benefits of energy development and the benefit of our company’s presence.”

            Private entities, working with nongovernmental organizations, have become increasingly active in helping developing countries. For oil companies, that’s happened even as the energy landscape has shifted in recent years, dimming Africa’s importance.


            The companies also see benefits when they make a deeper commitment to foreign lands where they work.

            When Exxon Mobil enters a new country, it conducts a needs assessment to see where it can do the most social good, officials said. The company also looks to employ a workforce that reflects the surrounding community.

            Almost 9 of every 10 Exxon Mobil workers in Africa are Africans, citizens of the countries where the company does business, officials said.

            That helps explain why Exxon Mobil’s biggest and longest-running philanthropic work in Africa centers on combating malaria.

            That push started because the disease was affecting productivity in Nigeria and Angola. Employees were getting sick, and it was hurting the bottom line.

            So Exxon Mobil began a workplace program to eradicate malaria. It saw immediate results, so the effort was expanded to the community as a whole.
            In the last 10 years, Exxon Mobil has spent nearly $110 million to battle malaria in Africa and Asia. It’s helped distribute 13.1 million bed nets — malaria is transmitted by mosquitoes — and nearly 1.8 million doses of anti-malaria drugs. As a result, mortality rates from the disease have gone down dramatically.
            “It’s important for our business,” McCarron said. “It’s important for Africa.”

            Education has been another initiative. Exxon Mobil has built dozens of schools in Nigeria alone.

            And the company’s latest philanthropic push looks at increasing economic opportunities for women.

            Officials said research indicates that women are more likely than men to spend their income on essentials like food, health care and education. In other words, investment in women becomes an investment in healthier communities. That, in turn, leads to sustainable long-term economic growth.



            European colonial powers generally abandoned their former colonies from the 1940′ through the 1970’s. Few were prepared for independence. National borders ignored tribal and cultural divisions. The European powers couldn’t have more completely set up Africa for failure if they were trying. Political corruption is endemic and wide-spread.

            That said, Africa is rich in resources and in people eager to learn how to exploit those resources and build modern nations. This is the pathway to weakening the power of corrupt dictators. Keeping the people in poverty until the dictators agree to reforms, is just the pathway to new dictators.

          • David Middleton

            I think Chris likes the idea of dictators judging by his attitude.

            MOD, a comment based on observation. Chris might take it as an insult, indirect or otherwise, but that’s his problem.

            I merely call it as I see it. You, on the other hand, accept the responsibility of judgement. You then have to be clinically decisive, and fair in you pronouncements. Chris described the weather in Scotland as “crap” with nothing more than anecdotal evidence. I find that insulting, as do 5 million permanent resident of Scotland, but you didn’t intervene to snip his comment.

            So where does this concept of “indirect” insult start, and where does it finish?

          • It’s been >100 °F in Dallas 13 of the last 15 days, including highs of 110 °F 7/19-21 and 112 °F on 7/22.

            Right now, Scottish weather sounds great.

          • David Middleton

            It brought back many memories from my youth. Nothing wrong with Scottish weather. There is no grass greener that that of my homeland.

            Meanwhile, I understand much of Spain has been suffering summer temperatures of 20C whilst the SE of England has been sweltering in 30C heat.

            Perhaps sunshine tourism will move from the Costa Blanca to the Costa Kent thanks to global warming.

            And if you think I believe that for a millisecond you are up a gum tree mate.


          • HotScot- I like dictators? I criticize Exxon’s investment in EG, as it will go into the pockets of the leaders, and David cheers the investment. So how exactly does that make me pro dictator?

          • Chris

            For fear of invoking the wrath of the MODS, I can’t express my opinions on your comment.

            Where does your tiny mind imagine profits from any commercial endeavour go to?

            Let me enlighten you. Your childish perception is that businesses simply distribute profits to their Directors etc. and they rush off to the local security deposit box where it will reside whilst losing value every day.

            The truth is, the people who put the money up, to take the risk of investing in the infrastructure and creating the employment to generate the profits, must be repaid their investment plus interest. What otherwise, would be the point in lending people money be?

            That’s what they do with their profits, they keep re investing them so they hopefully outstrip inflation. Meanwhile, they are creating jobs, building communities and improving peoples lives.

            Your own 401K investments do precisely the same thing. So while you’re complaining about it, you’re benefiting from the same thing, irrespective of how ethical your investments are.

            In fact your very employment is predicated on the profitable enterprises I have described, and you take full advantage of it. If you’re so against the principle, quit your job, head back to Seattle, and live on the street. It’s possibly the only place you won’t profit from commercialisation, assuming you don’t grub around in trash cans to live off the scraps of commercialisation and beg for the dregs of it’s success. Nor is that to disrespect the unfortunate people who find themselves there, they certainly don’t place themselves there voluntarily.

            Exxon must conform to the laws of the country it’s domiciled in, and the laws of the countries it operates in. Does it push the boundaries? Of course it does, that’s called progress, without which you and I would be having this conversation on slates, written with chalk and carried by runners across continents.

            Your concept of a dictator is in your own distorted mind. Criticising a profitable business as a dictatorial regime is simply nuts. The dictatorial aspect emerges when commercial enterprises meet dictators who allow their people to be exploited. The failing is the dictator’s abdication of his responsibility to advocate for his community.

            Your employer advocates on your behalf to his employer, to ensure you get a fair shake of the stick. And if you’re a profitable employee you reap the benefits, and judging by your comments, after twenty years, you’re considered a personal profit centre who pays his way and is rewarded for that endeavour. Your employers are ethical employers, they may work with, or for unethical enterprises, but that’s a matter for your conscience.

            Being that socialism is the alternative where you work for what you’re told to accept, I can’t see anything wrong with the conditions under which you thrive.

            Yet bizarrely, you condemn it.

          • David, do you understand the concept of a contract? There are 2 parties (or there can be more). EG is granting XOM the right to develop reserves in return for certain things – it can be royalties, infrastructure, or other things. But it is certainly not a single party contract.

            Since you are so certain of the ability of resource projects to weaken the power of corrupt dictators, can you give me several examples of this happening?

  12. Compared to the 10’s of thousands of people who die unnecessarily from fuel poverty each year the claimed death of a couple hundred eco -anarchists is SFA .
    Governments “knew ” what they were doing was a population elimination plan and the planets temperature is still run by mother nature .
    Eco -anarchists have been around since the 1960’s and would love nothing better than mass extermination .

    • Amber,

      Compared to the millions who have died from mosquito carried diseases since ddt was banned, thanks to the USA, all of these are insignificant. And it has been estimated that there were about 10mm native Americans, indians as they were known, both being misnomers as they were also immigrants here, until the evil white eyes moved in and killed them off, mostly by coughing or sneezing upon them, way before 1960.

    • I see. So it’s OK to murder people in poverty who are having their land taken away?

      “Eco -anarchists… would love nothing better than mass extermination .” If that’s true, they sure haven’t been very effective. Maybe because the people who have such ideas are extremely few and poorly organized.

      Much more common, obvious and better organized are the third world government officials who siphon off profits from fossil fuels that are sold abroad rather than used to provide energy and other resources to their own citizens. (See my above comment for the example David so kindly provided.)

      • Kristi Silber

        “I see. So it’s OK to murder people in poverty who are having their land taken away?”

        So then leave them with the land, to do nothing with it, so they can die in poverty.

        What a moron. Use the land, employ the people, and deliver profits and employment (being the employment is profit) or leave the whole lot to rot on the vine.

        What a vile example of humanity you are.

          • Chris

            Once again, you operate from your lofty position of idealism and cite the experiences of others to disguise the fact you have no experience.

            I lived in Hong Kong during Mao’s miracle years. You simply cannot comprehend the rows of tens of thousands of emaciated refugees from his failed agricultural policies, lined up along miles of fences, just for the chance of a bowl of rice.

            You have never witnessed the acres of corrugated shanty towns of refugees, simply swept away in a Typhoon, here today, gone tomorrow. Literally.

            Yet you seek to impress me with your remote recital of the second hand experiences of others?

            Yet again, more anecdotal evidence from you. A remote life spent imagining the experiences of others.

            Seriously, you have no idea what goes on out there. You really need to get a life.

          • Your evidence is Mao from the 60s and 70s? That has exactly nothing to do with what we are talking about. We are not talking about the impacts of centralized planning in a Communist country. I’ve lived in Singapore for 20 years, and have traveled extensively throughout the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia and Burma. Tell me, Hotspot, how many of those countries have you visited in the last 10 years? Or ever?

            My experience in the Philippines is based on talking to former Environment Secretary Gina Lopez after she spoke at a conference about Filipinos who have had their land taken away by mining companies. She talked about how Palawan was being destroyed by mining companies. A Unesco site that could bring in lots of tourist dollars was being destroyed for a few years of mining operations.

            So it’s you that really has no idea what goes on out there. When is the last time you traveled to Asia?

          • HotScot- then don’t, I don’t care. The meeting happened at the Intercontinental Hotel, in Makati.

            And you avoided any discussion of which countries in SE Asia you have been to (ever) and when is the last time you were in Asia. So we know the answer to that question.

          • Chris

            Not that it’s any of your concern, but I’m Chinese by birth. I now live in the UK.

            I have, and do travel extensively throughout Asia as I’m semi retired and have relatives and friends in places you haven’t heard of never mind visited.

            Having said all that, I could be as big a liar as you are, neither of us would ever know.

            So please, stop your petty chest beating.

      • Once again, Kristi has to change what others have said in order to raise the false indignation flag.

    • Amber,

      What does ASME qualified weld filler material (SFA) have to do with eco-anarchists?



    • It is a bit lengthy for a comment, but here is the latest on the matter of deaths from heat, cold and chronic underheating. Seventeen (17) times more deaths are caused by cold than by heat.


      Mortality risk attributable to high and low ambient temperature: a multicountry observational study

      Antonio Gasparrini, Yuming Guo, Masahiro Hashizume, Eric Lavigne, Antonella Zanobetti, Joel Schwartz, Aurelio Tobias, Shilu Tong, Joacim Rocklöv, Bertil Forsberg, Michela Leone, Manuela De Sario, Michelle L Bell, Yue-Liang Leon Guo, Chang-fu Wu, Haidong Kan, Seung-Muk Yi, Micheline de Sousa Zanotti Stagliorio Coelho, Paulo Hilario Nascimento Saldiva, Yasushi Honda, Ho Kim, Ben Armstrong



      Although studies have provided estimates of premature deaths attributable to either heat or cold in selected countries, none has so far offered a systematic assessment across the whole temperature range in populations exposed to different climates. We aimed to quantify the total mortality burden attributable to non-optimum ambient temperature, and the relative contributions from heat and cold and from moderate and extreme temperatures.


      We collected data for 384 locations in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand, UK, and USA. We fitted a standard time-series Poisson model for each location, controlling for trends and day of the week. We estimated temperature–mortality associations with a distributed lag non-linear model with 21 days of lag, and then pooled them in a multivariate meta-regression that included country indicators and temperature average and range. We calculated attributable deaths for heat and cold, defined as temperatures above and below the optimum temperature, which corresponded to the point of minimum mortality, and for moderate and extreme temperatures, defined using cutoff s at the 2·5th and 97·5th temperature percentiles.


      We analysed 74 225 200 deaths in various periods between 1985 and 2012. In total, 7·71% (95% empirical CI 7·43–7·91) of mortality was attributable to non-optimum temperature in the selected countries within the study period, with substantial differences between countries, ranging from 3·37% (3·06 to 3·63) in Thailand to 11·00% (9·29 to 12·47) in China. The temperature percentile of minimum mortality varied from roughly the 60th percentile in tropical areas to about the 80–90th percentile in temperate regions. More temperature-attributable deaths were caused by cold (7·29%, 7·02–7·49) than by heat (0·42%, 0·39–0·44). Extreme cold and hot temperatures were responsible for 0·86% (0·84–0·87) of total mortality.


      Most of the temperature-related mortality burden was attributable to the contribution of cold. The effect of days of extreme temperature was substantially less than that attributable to milder but non-optimum weather. This evidence has important implications for the planning of public-health interventions to minimise the health
      consequences of adverse temperatures, and for predictions of future effect in climate-change scenarios.

      Funding UK Medical Research Council.
      Copyright © Gasparrini et al. Open Access article distributed under the terms of CC BY.

      • Just imagine the numbers if indeed a new Maunder Minimum is starting. Governments totally unprepared by ideology. How quickly a few hot days melts the last winters memory….

  13. Why would a 14 year old Soros collaborate with the Nazis ? Doesn’t make sense . Where is the evidence ?

    • 1) to protect hisself,

      2) because he was raised to believe in a variable morality … its ok to screw over some people because:

      a) they would have been screwed over by someone else anyway
      b) they deserve it.
      c) they can afford it.
      d) whatever rationalization fits the current circumstances.

      • “a) they would have been screwed over by someone else anyway”

        That’s been Soros’ mantra: “If I did not do it, someone else would have.”

    • The evidence? He was in possession of a Gustav Klimt portrait of the Adele Bloch-Bauer, the Lady In Gold, stolen from Maria Altman’s family by the Nazis, among several other pieces of artwork. THAT is the evidence. Altman struggled for an extremely long time to get her family’s art works returned.
      When Soros was asked what it felt like to take possessions away (steal) from his Jewish neighbors, his response was that it felt good. His parents were Jewish but converted to Catholicism, as if that made a difference.
      I don’t give a flying goose in space whether you believe any of that or not, frankly, because a lot of Nazi-stolen and looted possessions and real estate were never returned to their rightful owners. After WWII ended, Austrian Jews were charged a “surtax” (exit fee) by the Austrian government if they wanted to leave and take any of their property with them and the surtax was equal to the value of those possessions.
      I do not have to be Jewish to be thoroughly offended by this heinous criminal behavior.

    • He boasted himself – the video is posted right here. No qualms whatsoever working for Eichmann in Hungary at 14. Sure, nazi terror , the Bettelheim syndrome, will produce monsters. This is why he was picked up for drug liberalizing, currency warfare, – a predator.

      The son likely does not have that narrative though. Reminds me of the Governator.

  14. For whatever reason this story made me wonder how Dr. Michael Mann’s lawsuits were going. That made me stumble over a story about Mark Steyn receiving the George Jonas Freedom Award. Steyn’s acceptance speech

    There is a generation who grew up on the wrong side of the Iron Curtain. They know exactly what it’s like to live under the boot of a totalitarian regime. George Jonas was one such.

    Jonas hated communism and was wary of the political correctness which seeks to impose a similar totalitarianism on us.

    Sometimes I think we won the Cold War only to show those Russians we can build a better police state.


    • commieBob

      The USSR did exactly what we asked them to do. They turned to Capitalism. Now they’re the enemy once again? Isn’t that just racism?

      • No, I think it’s more force of habit. 🙂

        Things took a big turn for the worse when Russia occupied Crimea but there were other causes. Some folks blame Obama for sending mixed messages. link

      • Jeffrey Sachs’ Shock Therapy under Yeltsin is indeed what the Hayek “capitalists” like to foist on supine economies. Russia dumped all that, hence the transatlantic carpet-chewing.
        The issue is Geopolitics from Halford Mackinder of Lincolnshire, founder of Hayek’s employer, the London School of Economics. Hitler’s infamous book has word for word translation from Geopolitics (by Haushofer). Hitler in Paris saying Napoleon, mein Vorgänger, lets it all hang out. Nato today going after Russia, pure Mackinder, Edward VII policy that spewed 2 world wars. Trump is not playing along – he has challenged Geopolitics.

        • Man you really do hate Hayek, and yet you demonstrate absolutely no ability to comprehend his work.
          On the other hand in every instance you declare that more government is always good.

          BTW, the Russians abandoned communism because it doesn’t work. Nobody foisted it on them.

          • Soros is a Mont Pelerin Society protege , of Hayek’s and Popper’s London School of Economics. Jeffrey Sachs is the Hayek modernizer, shoved Shock therapy on Russia, rather like Pinochet in Chile. Neither Pinochet or Sachs’s craziness works. Soros is a communitarian, not exactly a Communist, rather of the same nuttiness as El Duce Mussolini. That stuff does’nt work either, or works as designed causing absolute disaster. Friedman of Mont Pelerin is the same, even if a fake fight with Hayek might seem otherwise. How about M.Thatcher’s IEA? No surprise she invited Pinochet for tea.

        • Getting along with Russia is good thing – Trump says competitor. The cold war is really over, a replay would be farce, to paraphrase Marx. That is why the von Mises cliches from the 70’s sound , well, so passe.

        • MarkW

          I didn’t mean to imply that. My point is that at least the USSR made a monumental shift to Capitalism which deserves at least some acknowledgement. The term Oligarch is considered almost a popular insult by the West, yet entrepreneurs, even predatory ones, are considered admirable in the West. What’s the difference?

          Russian politics isn’t squeaky clean, but neither is America’s, nor Britain’s. I watched an interpreted interview with Putin which was quite revealing. It seems he’s no less a straight talker than Trump. In it he pointed out that whilst Russia is surrounded by American bases with weapons trained on it from EU territory, Russia has no such complex surrounding America.

          And nothing like half way measures, The former USSR didn’t negotiate over the watered down version of communism, socialism, they just went full on, straight to unadulterated Capitalism.

          They’re not good at it, in fact pretty crap, but so was the West when it first operated it as a political imperative.

  15. “…often for the production of consumer staples such as coffee and palm oil,…”
    Palm oil which is used to make bio-diesel in order to “save the environment”.

    • Yes, rain forests must be destroyed to “save the planet” and the orangutans and their habitat be damned.

      Anyway, if I were a billionaire, I might have some plastic surgery done (at least if I looked like Soros).

  16. Gee, a bunch of holier-than-thou’s screwing with people’s livelihoods. Some people take that badly. Go figure.

  17. The Phillipines? Anyone who has read the news should know that there’s a drug war going on there, as well as a fight between the central government and some outlying tribes, as well as a Jihadi insurgency in some areas. Sure, there’s been plenty of killing, but “environmentalism” is so far down the list of reasons as to be negligible.

  18. The bad news in this article is the rise of Alexander Soros as his old man reaches his end days. It means the evil George Soros has propagated around the world will continue. In fact I thought I read that George had already given his money to either Alexander or these groups.

    I find it a bit hypocritical that Alexander Soros is pushing Congress about a transparency law when I will bet a dime to a dollar that they adamantly oppose transparency at EPA and elsewhere.

    I wrote several months ago about the “cross fertilization” among all these groups. Alexander clearly demonstrates that. He is an advisory in one group, a board member in another, and probably the chairman in another. Another change in the not-for-profit tax statutes, i.e., you can’t sit, advise or be an attorney for more than one board.

    • That evil, evil advocating for democracy and civil rights, especially in eastern European countries where Soros grew up. It’s a good thing you’re on this important issue, Edwin.

      • What a glorious sounding phrase: human rights?
        Who could possibly oppose that?

        The problem is that what most leftists call human rights boil down to a right to steal from others because there is stuff you want but can’t afford on your own.

      • Chris, you will know the truth eventually. Democ and civil rights indeed. I suppose that the Deutche Demokratische Republic fooled you, too. Or you think the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is South Korea! What do you expect an ugly Champagne Socialist to call his exploits? By their real names? The Davos clique doesnt have a democratic or human rights bone in their bodies. To be fooled by such devious nonsense by an obvious global governance advocate means you have been unwittingly schooled to it.

        Hey, argue and fight for dangerous climate change, but do it not because you are told it is so. Really it is not a sin to be sceptical, it is essential to be.

      • Soros, Inc. is not advocating for civil rights.
        Soros, Inc. is advocating for Soros, Inc.
        The use of “civil rights” and “environment” and “climate” are just marketing tools for managing the gullible.

        • hunter

          “The use of “civil rights” and “environment” and “climate” are just marketing tools for managing the gullible.”

          That would be Chris.

          • Haha – regarding climate, yeah, it’s gullible me, along with the Fortune 1000, insurance companies, oil companies, the world’s largest investment funds. Pretty much everyone but HotScot and his band of merry men and women here on WUWT.

          • Wait – HotScot, you have a band of merry men? Dangit, I wanna join…how come no one told me about it?



            Where did everybody go all of the sudden? And why is it so quiet in here now.

            I feel lonely…

            (Just to clear, Chris, I’m just making a lighthearted joke…cause I can’t resist… 🙂 )


          • rip

            Ha! Rip my dear fellow, join me. We shall swashbuckle though the forests of Chris’s, venture to the shores of Kristi, and with stout heart, sally forth to the domain of Gollum, AKA, Griff, that feared stalker of the hallowed halls of WUWT, to finally vanquish the daft idea that CO2 cause global warming.

            Sorry, narrative kinda went downhill at the last bit.

          • HotScot, the only place you have vanquished the idea that CO2 causes global warming is here. Even your Scottish government says so. Even BP says so. Even Shell says so. But keep jousting at those windmills, it gives purpose to your life.

          • Chris

            I haven’t attempted to vanquish anything. I have merely asked for the empirical evidence that in the real world atmospheric CO2 causes global warming.

          • Hot,

            Ah…so it’s a Fellowship and not a band of merry men…makes perfect sense!

            I do find it ironic that both sides see themselves as fighting against mordor, and instinctually characterize the other as tilting at windmills (see Chris’s comment for example). Or, maybe it’s not ironic, but rather simply the nature of the beast.

            Oh well, whether we’re quixotic or heroic, what’s self evidently true is that it’s nigh unto impossible to have a constructive conversation under these terms of engagement.



          • rip

            not sure about the tilting at windmills bit. I ask only one simple question: where is the empirical evidence that in the ‘wild’ CO2 causes global warming. I don’t think that’s an unreasonable question ask when the fate of humanity is predicated on CO2 being the culprit of all our climatic woes.

            So far, Kirsti and Chris have produced nothing but evasion and diversionary evidence. They should have been swamping me with innumerable studies proving beyond all reasonable doubt that CO2 causes global warming, but strangely, not even one study so far.

            It seems to me the evidence for the prosecution consists of “yea, but no, but yea.”


            Yea, but no, but yea. The girl featured in the clip is a guy, Matt Lucas. You might need some help with the dialect. Similar to alarmists, and their logic.


          • Hot,

            Holy…what the… what was that!?! Were those actual words she was trying to speak, or just some strange guttural grunts like it seemed? 🙂

            As for tilting at windmills, one of us has to be, either us or them. But I’d go you one further…I’m not even asking for extraordinary “beyond all reasonable doubt” type evidence. I’d settle for evidence that was merely strong. The inconsistent and weak attribution / evidence driving the current alarmism is just pathetic, in my opinion. And it certainly shouldn’t be the basis for altering the very fabric our modern society.


          • rip

            I’m impressed you watched it at all. But it’s a fair representation of what we get from alarmists, prevarication, excuses, yea, but no, but she did it, not me.

            And I agree with you on the evidence bit, but shouldn’t the alarmist at least demonstrate the underlying reason for their concern, before moving on to the supporting evidence?

            I mean, they have tons of supporting evidence, I just don’t know what it supports.

            It’s a fairly simple concept. CO2 causes global warming. OK, they should demonstrate it first, then introduce the supporting evidence. Not the other way around.

            I really don’t get it. How has this entire subject been blown out of all proportion when the underlying principle can’t be demonstrated?

            And I reiterate my stance on science in general. It is more often wrong than right, otherwise there would be no need for experiments. Our alarmist brethren would have us believe otherwise.

          • Chris

            Funny that, virtually every organisation you mention invest’s in fossil fuels to fund your pension.

            Shall I add hypocrite to the list of your dubious qualities?

          • Nice try, Hotscot, but I don’t have a pension, I have a 401K. And no, none of my monies are invested in oil stocks.

          • Chris

            As far as I’m aware a 401K is a means of saving tax free to allow for the money to be provided as a pension. Is that wrong?

            And whilst your investments aren’t perhaps directly into oil, they might be invested in minerals, plastics, energy production, any number of things reliant on fossil fuels (which is pretty much everything) so don’t give me your self righteous BS.

          • Well, a 401K it’s not a pension (ie a defined benefit plan) as such. It’s a defined contribution plan, but it serves the same basic purpose: having money in retirement. And unless Chris doesn’t put his 401K money into targeted or indexed funds (which most 401Ks offer and which do include fossil fuel companies in their mixes) and only puts the money into his companies stock (usually the only single stock on offer in 401Ks) , he’s a liar as well as a hypocrite. And if he’s only putting his 401K money into his companies stock, he’s a poor investor with such a non-diverse portfolio – His company goes under and so too would his 401K retirement fund.

          • John Endicott, I invest in software companies, direct investment. But nice try with your diatribe. My portfolio is doing well, better than an S&P 500 indexed fund.

          • You mentioned your 401k (which tend to have defined choices such as index funds, targeted funds, etc. and *NOT* individual company stock investments), now it’s your investments in individual software companies. That your story keeps changing is more proof that you are lying.

    • Dont worry about Alex. This terrible bunch are done. The look on Soros pere’s face tells us he knows it.

  19. Some day, Soros and his mutant offspring and psycophants (intentional spelling) will die of natural causes or just plain stupidity. Until then, yes, we need to keep a weather eye on their shenanigans and make them look as obnoxious and power-hungry as they are. That is extremely important.

    There is always a way to beat them at their own game.

    • sara,I like your new term a lot? There is something psychotic about designer-brained admirerers of these ugly cynical would be tyrants.

    • Maybe you know the story of the Rabbi of Prague – his Golem that his wife animated went out on a murderous rampage, she could’nt recall it as the name , shem, was lost. It looks human, with no soul.
      Rumors that it still sits in a Prague loft, are fake news.

  20. I wonder how environmental activists in North Korea are doing?

    • Just imagine an entire mountain collapsing on that thermonuclear test tunnel. Trump has convinced them such tests are real bad, a true environmentalist.

  21. David,

    If your articles get rated by all the silly troll comments you’re getting, this one is an A+++++++. Well, I really liked it anyway, kind of like Ralphie’s teacher with his theme on “what I want for Christmas”. Ignore the trolls, don’t feed them. I have found that making sense to liberals is virtually impossible, they are not wired to evaluate factual information.

    • JimG1

      Cris and Kristi being shining examples of their ilk. According to Kristi all contributors to WUWT are biased and indoctrinated (her words, not mine).

      But she still hasn’t come up with the empirical evidence to demonstrate CO2 causes GW. Despite numerous request’s.

      In point of fact, she, as a Masters qualified scientist told me it was impossible to demonstrate.

      Yes, on WUWT she announced it is”Impossible”. A Masters qualified alarmist scientist actually admitted it is “impossible”.

      Therefore, as a humble layman, I pronounce the climate change debate now concluded.

      There is no evidence that atmospheric CO2 causes climate change because a far higher authority than me has told me it’s impossible to demonstrate.

      Back to work guys. Stoke up the furnaces of prosperity.

      • HotScot

        In the geological record, such as it is, there is some evidence that temperature causes co2 to increase, though it is not consistent, but it is scientifically verifiable that as temp goes up more co2 is released from that sequestered in the 70% of of our planet which is covered by water, called oceans. Sun, undersea volcanism, tectonic plate movement, oceans and their currents, cloud formation, resultant weather patterns, etc., etc. cause climate and they all vary as does our planets orbit, inclination and precession to result in a chaotic sytem. CO2 is a very minor player if it’s playing at all. And the lefties have it backwards.

        • Chris

          Well Chris, mate, as usual, you missed out every bit of my post other than the bit you wanted to focus on, Scotland.

          But I didn’t mention Scotland.

          “According to Kristi all contributors to WUWT are biased and indoctrinated (her words, not mine).” Nope, no Scotland there.

          “But she still hasn’t come up with the empirical evidence to demonstrate CO2 causes GW. Despite numerous request’s.” Nope, no Scotland there.

          “In point of fact, she, as a Masters qualified scientist told me it was impossible to demonstrate.” Nope, no Scotland there either.

          And whilst Scotland is my beloved country, your sneering condescension merely betrays your jealousy.

          Happily, also, the SNP failed to execute their predominant manifesto promise, Scottish independence. They are equally failing by consigning the Scot’s to energy poverty. That will be the rock they perish on, well, apart from their economic and educational policies, amongst others.

          Any more to say about Scotland you can trawl up from the depths of the internet? I mean, you don’t actually know anything about the country other than by vicarious means.

          But that’s your style, isn’t it Chris?

  22. I see the end of things on this tortured jaundiced face and in his eyes. I see the end of the vaunted global gov’nance that has failed so miserably so many times, wiping out a 100+millions. It is a satanical wish, a sickness that the left can’t let go of. We will very soon read of this broken man’s greatness and the loss to the world in the NYT, Wapo, Huffington Puff and the Guardian. Why do I think of Humpty Dumpty when I look at this picture.

  23. Dear oh god, can WUWT sink any lower? Soros, evil?

    Like the EU, misguided, wrong, destructive, clumsy, foolish, idealistic, for sure, but evil?

    That is ridiculous. Like the EU which exists purely to stop war in Europe, Soros has the same desire to see global change. You can argue about whether Soros is right or wrong, but to put him in the same boat as Pol Pot, Himler and Stalin is ridiculous.

    Really, stop making a fool of yourself WUWT, it is embarrassing and giving ammunition to the CAGW alarmists.

    (Disclaimer, CAGW is a crosk of s#1t, CO2 sensitivity is low, and CO2 is good for the planet. OK, got that everyone?)

    • Soros’s drug legalization efforts have killed, massively. Hungary has thrown his outfit out. More are following. Soros’s is the von Hayek, Friedman, Mises golem.
      The EU narrative is simply hilarious – its in Soros’ pocket. List of known assets available,
      Soros is the bagman for the Blimps – British liberal imperialists.

      • “Soros’s drug legalization efforts have killed, massively.”

        As much as alcohol or less?

        Oh no, Budweiser are evil! So is Napa Valley!!!!!

        Come on, get real, please.

          • For a start there has to be an intent to cause harm and injury.

            This is why there is a big difference between manslaughter and murder. One lacks intent.

          • What if you just don’t care whether what you do is hurting others so you never stop to check?

          • MattS,
            Did you ever hear of a sociopath? They would think no more of killing a person than stepping on a bug. No one counts to them except them. No intent, no conscience, just about pure evil, in my book. Soros may well qualify.

          • Some people just like to give others the benefit of the doubt no matter how certain they are of the truth.

        • That’s the old mother’s milk narrative from the ’80s. Ever hear of the Lindesmith outfit? Look at cocaine in Peru, Bolivia, Mexico . Drugs sure do kill.

  24. Soros is like a ,James Bond bad guy with grandiose schemes to take over the world.
    He has a web of astroturf organuzations meddling in people’s lives in nearly all countries.
    He also funds special training for journalists who he apparently gives “stipends” to.
    Soros was a very frequent visitor to the Obama whitehouse, btw.

    • So what? The Koch brothers are spending 10X what Soros is, I don’t see you complaining about them taking over the world.

      • Chris

        So what? The Koch brothers are spending 10X what Soros is, I don’t see you complaining about them taking over the world.

        You lie. Justify your claim with year of the money spent, who it was spent by, and for what purpose.
        (Soros has been manipulating global currency markets and money supplies for decades, and has bankrupted several countries getting his Enron-Ponzi-scheme billions. Those billions have globally gone to socialist projects since the 1980’s.

      • Chris, before you continue spouting the party line about the Koch brothers and old commie George, I suggest you peruse this dataset


        This is cumulative back to 1990, but if you want the breakdown by election cycle just scroll down at the box. To help simplify your search Koch Industries is at no. 32, Soros Fund Management is at no.13, Fahr LLC at no.2 is Mr. Steyer. Of course, if you really look it becomes apparent that the collective contributions of the unions, most notably the teachers’ unions and other public employees unions make all the billionaires look like chumps

  25. >>
    This man is PURE EVIL!

    Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;
    I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.
    The evil that men do lives after them,
    The good is oft interred with their bones;
    So let it be with Caesar.

    –Julius Caesar, Act III, Scene II


  26. comes to mind –


    Fight against inflation: Maduro deletes five zeros from the Bolívar

    tagesschau.de – 18 hours ago

    Hyperinflation: Venezuela deletes five zeros from its currency

    Venezuela nationalizes oil facilities.

    But can not sell its oil derivatives.

    Likewise: Oil companies BP, Shell, Agip and so on each have been building global gas stations networks for over 100 years.

    Why should they sell venezuelan petrol?

    If Maduro wants to sell his petrol, he can set up his own global gas stations network.

  27. George looks like he is not long for this world and his passing will be a blessing for those of us not brainwashed with his lies. He will be missed by those who rely on his billions to disseminate crappy science. I am always amazed that the biggest socialists first made their money as capitalists and that poor socialists who eventually gain political ascendency tend to end up extremely rich. I see George has a son who no doubt will inherit dad’s wealth and continue to fund the uneducated and dishonest eco warriors and social misfits who infest universities and public service.

Comments are closed.