Friday
Feb142014
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill So, greens are totalitarians. Just as we thought.
Feb 14, 2014 Greens The Greens have decided to enliven things by calling for a purge of heretics from within the government machine:
The Green Party of England and Wales has called for a purge of government advisors and ministers who do not share its views on climate change.
Any senior advisor refusing to accept "the scientific consensus on climate change" should be sacked, it said.
Party leader Natalie Bennett said the rule must apply to all senior advisors, including those with no responsibility for environmental issues.
It's rather like the Socialist Workers Party isn't it? Wannabe Lenins and teen revolutionaries who never quite grew up. Sad really.
Reader Comments (93)
Only difference between the greens and stalin is that stalin murdered his opponents.
"...Noone has mentioned Lysenko so far." --Stephen Prower
We should never forget Vavilov:
http://gyre.umeoce.maine.edu/physicalocean/Tomczak/science+society/lectures/illustrations/lecture34/vavilov.html
Vavilov was imprisoned and murdered by starvation.
Natalie Bennett: "Yep, we need the whole government behind this - this is an emergency situation we're facing now."
No, Natalie. An emergency is a poor bloody infantryman facing a Taliban car-bomber coming at him in Afghanistan and trying to decide what to do. I'm sure he'd welcome the luxury of the 'emergency' that is Global Warming.
Does this woman still have a valid visa?
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/visas-immigration/visiting/
Wijnand Feb 14, 2014 at 6:29 PM: "In my country (The Netherlands) the Greens are pretty stupid, confrontational and unrealistic, but nothing like this..."
And that's the point, Wijnand. They come to you as a seemingly risible organisation so that you don't see how they've managed to insinuate themselves into the key areas of government, That's the trick. You think yourself a fool for missing it so you'd rather deny your foolishness - and allow their access to control. Too late then....
A nasty litle wannabe thug. In the US, some members of Congress aare seeking ways to silence climate skeptics. They think the public is served best if they get to pick and choose who gets heard. Our state run news, NPR has already accomplished this, of course. They simply will not report on problems or questions with the climate consensus or those who promote it. We may be living in a twilight that will become much darker much more quickly than we can imagine. These climate thugs and liars are serious.
Natalie Bennett? ... Gordon Bennett!
Against better judgement, I listened to the first few minutes of Jeremy Vine’s tawdry, tabloid BBC R2 programme at noon today.
The main discussion topic was along the lines of;
“Were you a climate sceptic, but the current situation has caused you to see the light, and convert to the (BBC/Guardian/Greenpeace) believer view?”
After five minutes of introductory comments, it was clear that the programme was loaded with BBC-approved warmist candidates, so I switched off, as by then, my wife was fed up with me shouting at the radio!
Was anyone brave enough to listen to it?
The BBC and its green chums have clearly spotted an excellent opportunity to attack sceptics, and ram their mantra home, after being cowed by cold weather in recent winters.
It is a shame that we are essentially forced to fund their searing bias.
Splitters!
So our Natilie thinks it justified to purge the government and civil service of any dissenting thought
Okay so did that include Enough Powell on immigration in the Heath government
Or Micheal Hezeltine over Westland in the Thatcher government
Or maybe Robin Cook and Clair Short over the invasion of Iraq in the Blair government
Here's the UK Green Party's 10-point plan for dealing with floods:
http://greenparty.org.uk/news/2014/02/14/green-party-launch-10-point-flood-response-plan/
Item No. 3 is the bit about weeding out heretics:
I hope all readers will also consider Item 7 with the seriousness that it deserves:
Alexander: Re Vine. Yes, I listened to it. And yes, I was shouting at the radio. I sent a couple of emails to Vine but to no avail. In the end I sent a steaming email of complaint to the program. I guess it was filed - in the WPB.
If Farage were clever he would have UKIP state that all Greens should be purged from government positions. Based on rejecting safety of GMOs, nuclear power, pesticides; and junk science of resource depletion, climate models, mass extinctions, etc.
Jeremy Vine's guest was Tom Burke, Director of E3G and former Executive Director of FoE:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Burke_(environmentalist)
Re the Jet Stream/Gulf Stream mixup, there was also an episode of Channel 5's The Wright Stuff last September, where they utterly confused greenhouse gases and ozone-destroying CFCs. :-)
The Greens are nothing like the SWP.
For a start, you never heard an elected prime minister say: "Vote blue, go Trot".
And Trots (like cats) cleanse their own groupuscules. I never heard a Trot demand that all non-Trots should be removed from the BBC, for example.
Comparisons with fascism are equally far off the mark. Did Adolf Hitler demand the removal of all civil servants who didn't agree with him when he had the support of 1% of the electorate? Of course not, he was far too clever a politician. For example, he had the foresight to form a political party, while you Bish-hitters think you can win by the sheer force of reason.
@Feb 14, 2014 at 4:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlex Cull
Thanks again for the transcript Alex. One to keep :)
I don't know why anyone is complaining that the BBC have given a platform to Bennett. The interviewer, after letting her have the chance to draw back from the extremity of her claims, is clearly happy to let her babble on and hang herself with her own words.
She's just embarrassing, just like any loon oblivious to how mad they look when they feel they finally have the nations ear and let rip - be it the BNP or David Icke.
Alexander
I must have turned off at about the same time as you, after shouting at the radio.
I heard the trailer on Ken Bruce (I quite like "Popmaster") so sent a preemptive email with regard to the Dawlish rail line which was mentioned as a possible victim of CC. My point was if you build a railway on a beach and fail to maintain it then it will be washed away in a storm. I have to agree with Harry Passfield that Vine is a pire CC propagandist. Today was the last time of listening for me.
Not often that I think the BBC gets it right but on this occasion, no question. Getting that unequivocal confirmation of the “need to remove dissenting thought” was well done by this reporter. The problem is that this will pass the vast majority of people by – most will not have seen it anyway. For most of those who did, it will be without any recognition of the seriousness of what she was saying. On the basis of the simplistic assumption by many that “green = good”, I would guess the group-think (i.e. the large number of those who do not think) might even agree with her.
Schrodinger's Cat on Feb 14, 2014 at 3:06 PM
"I love it. Almost every aspect of this woman's statement is either outrageous, stupid or just plain wrong. It speaks volumes about her party. Well done."
Keep your comment in mind when you read this article:
The 'leaky pipeline' of women in science
Despite a growing interest in science at school, Eleanor Muffitt [the author of the article], opted for humanities at university; she asks why girls let their talent fall by the wayside
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationopinion/10637941/The-leaky-pipeline-of-women-in-science.html
Remember also, that Caroline Lucas, the previous leader of the Greens, graduated with a degree in English and a further degree in Wimin Studies, while Chris (call me Lord) Smith has a PhD in poetry!
No wonder they know so much about Science, Engineering and how it applies to the Environment, Climate and Weather!
We are in interesting times. We have survived the Inquisition, Communism, Nazism. We have supposedly benefitted from the reformation of the 16C, The Enlightenment of the 18C and the expansion of universities in the 1960s: yet we appear to be returning to the 12C , when The Inquisition was started.
I would suggest there are two basic human characteristics : those who are prepared to live and let live and those who wish to impose their views on others. I would suggest that certain humans have a desire to tell others what to do and these types are attracted to any philosophy or group which offers them this power. The Green Politics offers people the option of telling people what to think, say and do in order to benefit The World.
At the Eichman Trial, an israeli journalist cameup with the phrase " The Banality of Evil ". I would suggest that people
who have achieved nothing in life, are inadequate and have inferiority complexes are attracted to philosophies which provides them with the justification to exert power over others. If one looks at those who were active in The Inquisition , the Communists and Nazis they were neither the bravest or brighest but those with the greatest resntment and inferiority complexes. I have yet come across any extreme green type who actually provides any benefit to the poorest members of society - have they developed new sewage treatment or water treatment systems, improved crop yield,improved crop resistance to disease, improved livestock, reduced water needs for irrigation, improved basic medical treatment ?
I think it is time to tell these green fanatics that if they wish to improve the quality of peoples lives to get a worthwhile job- perhaps they could start by joining the teams which clean our sewers? If they are bright enough they can go up to Imperial and read for degrees Civil Engineering in order to design affordable sewage and water treatment systems in poor areas.
The Green Party is a religion with 16,000 members, so it's more like a cult.
To put it into perspective CAMRA has 160,000 members.
It's another sign of a new generation that's not learned the lessons history should have taught us. A failure to educate. History repeats. So sad!
Charlie, I suspect it is partly due to the decline in influence of traditional religion in western societies. The people genuinely wishing to do good, or those merely wishing to order the lives of others, still need to find an outlet. Why it particularly seems to afflict the English-speaking nations, I don't know.
In the UK, I certainly think there is an element of truth in what Richard Lindzen expressed to MPs the other day. I am not saying that there are no talented people who study climate, but there is clearly a body of people who think that any study of, taking an interest in, or having an opinion on, matters environmental somehow necessarily makes one 'scientific'.
Media, including the BBC, clearly encourages this in some misguided attempt to 'bring science to the people'. Thus the BBC web-pages have a combined "Science and the Environment" page. ("Technology" is separate, but often seems to restrict itself mainly to telecoms/communications/electronic-games.)
The problem goes back a long way, and is probably also strongly influenced by the decline of the industrial economy. I recall green activists getting to come and proselytize in my school in the 1970's about nuclear power and "chemicals". Even then, ignorance was clearly no impediment to their self-confident hectoring about the evils of, well, most things, it seemed.
Natalie Bennett's rant [thanks, Alex Cull, I couldn't have borne listening to it] is telling in one respect. I think it is indicative of how her ilk have managed to gain the influence they have: Not by winning elections, but from inside other organisations, as advisers etc. And it is also clear that some contrary opinions are beginning to encroach on their turf.
We probably have the internet to thank for this. In the climate-gate emails, Professor Phil Jones displayed a certain tristesse that people who disagreed with him were now able to communicate this to others.
It is because they deeply care so very very much. Even if it kills you.
As said above I suppose the intent is benign....Even when mass death results......So that's OK then......
According to Wikipedia, the Green Party of England and Wales has a total of one seat in Parliament. So it's amusing that they think they can make such sweeping demands (or any demands at all). I guess the Great Purge of the Deniers will just have to wait until after the Revolution.
Jasmine
Indeed.
They do, however, have righteousness on their side.
Just feel the overwhelming moral weight.............
Let's hope those words haunt her political aspirations for the rest of her life.
The thing that dolts like her don't understand is that the only criteria that matter for an adviser or analyst are competence and integrity. A good professional puts aside their personal views and does the job to the best of their ability. That's what I (and the best of my colleagues) did in the public service.
It is much better to have a competent and honest adviser/policy analyst whose personal opinion is the opposite of yours, than to have a "believer" whose work is inevitably tainted by their views. That is why so much Green policy is shite. They already "know" the answer, even before the question has been formulated.
"Watermelons", as James Delingpole calls them - green on the outside, red on the inside.
She has a Masters degree in Mass exCommunication.
I fear for the mental state of Channel 4's John Snow and Tom Clark. John Snow is getting more and more hysterical the longer he stands in flowing sewage by the side of the Thames. In his current mental state, everything in the world is the result of climate change.
This concerted push by all the media to blame all weathre on climate change, just shows how desperate the warmists have become now that all the scientific evidence shows no AGW and a likely return to colder conditions.
Today's Telegraph is at it with the California drought "the region is experiencing a lack of rain not seen since 1580". Bang in the middle of the Little Ice Age, but no mention of that.
I can see her point.
In a democracy; its hard to do what you want when so many disagree with you.
The Green party mentality finally exposed - sack anyone in government, or likely anywhere that disagrees with you. Hey maybe jail as well if you persist. Greater coverage should be given to the 'thoughts' of the green movement. Likely as not if people could see their human hating intolerant extremism they would be sickened by it. Let's see some real investigative journalism infiltrating their movement exposing the dark green agenda, and the crackpots that support it. People are starting to wonder how such beliefs have become influential and even policy despite little electoral support.
We had something like this in 2007 in Oz when Labor (sic) won the general election. Jon Faine, an ABC radio "star" suggested to a newspaper editor that all "right wing" journalists should be purged because the "people had chosen".
Now that the people have rejected the labor party, Jon Faine is not volunteering to be purged. Mind you, I think he's just as keen to silence anyone who disagrees with him.
A couple of comments about "fascist". The Fascists were members of an Italian political party. Nothing to do with Germany. The bad buys in Germans were members of the national socialist workers' party of Germany. aka "nazi". You couldn't belong to both of them.
I couldn't resist a peek at Natalie Bennet's Facebook page. It's an alternative universe over there.
Sadly, the BBC position on what this 'lady' seeks to do is that her ideas are a good start.
Perhaps the mismanagement of the waterways is retaliation for climategate, didn't they say a few years ago that they needed a good disaster?
Greens are a bit like horses - you can't live with them and you can't shoot 'em.
@Keith MacDonald
And Jeremy Clarkson....
Next us deniers will be forced to wear yellow stars
The Deep Ecologists know how this works. David Brower explains, “I founded Friends of the Earth to make the Sierra Club look reasonable. Then I founded the Earth Island Institute to make Friends of the Earth look reasonable. Earth First! now makes us look reasonable. We’re still waiting for someone to come along and make Earth First! look reasonable.” [Virginia I.Postrel, The Green Road to Serfdom, pp. 23-4].
quoted in 'The Green Machine' by journalist Robert J.Bidinotto published 1993.
Rick
Yes....
Leave.Clarkson.Alone...........................
Although in Bennett's new dystoutopia he'd be the first against the wall I suspect......I mean, he even placed an internal combustion engine ON the North Pole....sacrilege ....
As this boils down to matters of faith, such as prophesy and dogma, they have the template available in The Test Act 1673.
Just a little editing, which they are well able for and there you have it every public officer has to swear an oath that climate change etc, etc.
They won't though. Will they?
It struck me that Ms Lucas might need some practical help from us recusants. So I emailed this:
Here's an idea for implementing item 3 of your new plan. If you dig in the archives you'll find the Test Acts. These could serve as a template for a new act. For example:
Test Act, 1673 “I, N, do declare that I do believe that there is not any transubstantiation in the sacrament of the
Lord’s Supper, nor in the elements of the bread
and the wine, at or after the consecration thereof
by any person whatsoever”.
Test Act 2014
"I, N, do declare that I do believe that there is anthropogenic global warming that will fulfill prophesy of deluge, conflagration and generally cataclysm. That further this is caused solely and utterly by Carbon Dioxide at the hands of human greed for which we must do penance. I declare that any who do not aver this shall be as anathema".
If her majesty is not keen to give asent, no problem the heir apparent will not hesitate, given his chance.
I hope you find this suggestion helpful.
Your recusant