Of course, Al denied he did anything improper in selling this big government, high tax program considering the moral truth he was portraying, despite exaggeration, and convenient deletion.

I encourage you to consider the source of this story, with an eye toward removing this obstacle from Al’s eventual move to save mankind from itself from the office of the President of the United States.

Published: March 13, 2007
New York Times

Hollywood has a thing for Al Gore and his three-alarm film on global warming, “An Inconvenient Truth,” which won an Academy Award for best documentary. So do many environmentalists, who praise him as a visionary, and many scientists, who laud him for raising public awareness of climate change.

Don J. Easterbrook, a geology professor, has cited “inaccuracies” in “An Inconvenient Truth.”
But part of his scientific audience is uneasy. In talks, articles and blog entries that have appeared since his film and accompanying book came out last year, these scientists argue that some of Mr. Gore’s central points are exaggerated and erroneous. They are alarmed, some say, at what they call his alarmism.

“I don’t want to pick on Al Gore,” Don J. Easterbrook, an emeritus professor of geology at Western Washington University, told hundreds of experts at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America. “But there are a lot of inaccuracies in the statements we are seeing, and we have to temper that with real data.”

Mr. Gore, in an e-mail exchange about the critics, said his work made “the most important and salient points” about climate change, if not “some nuances and distinctions” scientists might want. “The degree of scientific consensus on global warming has never been stronger,” he said, adding, “I am trying to communicate the essence of it in the lay language that I understand.”

Although Mr. Gore is not a scientist, he does rely heavily on the authority of science in “An Inconvenient Truth,” which is why scientists are sensitive to its details and claims.

Criticisms of Mr. Gore have come not only from conservative groups and prominent skeptics of catastrophic warming, but also from rank-and-file scientists like Dr. Easterbook, who told his peers that he had no political ax to grind. A few see natural variation as more central to global warming than heat-trapping gases. Many appear to occupy a middle ground in the climate debate, seeing human activity as a serious threat but challenging what they call the extremism of both skeptics and zealots.

Kevin Vranes, a climatologist at the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado, said he sensed a growing backlash against exaggeration. While praising Mr. Gore for “getting the message out,” Dr. Vranes questioned whether his presentations were “overselling our certainty about knowing the future.”

Typically, the concern is not over the existence of climate change, or the idea that the human production of heat-trapping gases is partly or largely to blame for the globe’s recent warming. The question is whether Mr. Gore has gone beyond the scientific evidence.

“He’s a very polarizing figure in the science community,” said Roger A. Pielke Jr., an environmental scientist who is a colleague of Dr. Vranes at the University of Colorado center. “Very quickly, these discussions turn from the issue to the person, and become a referendum on Mr. Gore.”

“An Inconvenient Truth,” directed by Davis Guggenheim, was released last May and took in more than $46 million, making it one of the top-grossing documentaries ever. The companion book by Mr. Gore quickly became a best seller, reaching No. 1 on the New York Times list.

Mr. Gore depicted a future in which temperatures soar, ice sheets melt, seas rise, hurricanes batter the coasts and people die en masse. “Unless we act boldly,” he wrote, “our world will undergo a string of terrible catastrophes.”

He clearly has supporters among leading scientists, who commend his popularizations and call his science basically sound. In December, he spoke in San Francisco to the American Geophysical Union and got a reception fit for a rock star from thousands of attendees.

“He has credibility in this community,” said Tim Killeen, the group’s president and director of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, a top group studying climate change. “There’s no question he’s read a lot and is able to respond in a very effective way.”

Some backers concede minor inaccuracies but see them as reasonable for a politician. James E. Hansen, an environmental scientist, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies and a top adviser to Mr. Gore, said, “Al does an exceptionally good job of seeing the forest for the trees,” adding that Mr. Gore often did so “better than scientists.”

Still, Dr. Hansen said, the former vice president’s work may hold “imperfections” and “technical flaws.” He pointed to hurricanes, an icon for Mr. Gore, who highlights the devastation of Hurricane Katrina and cites research suggesting that global warming will cause both storm frequency and deadliness to rise. Yet this past Atlantic season produced fewer hurricanes than forecasters predicted (five versus nine), and none that hit the United States.

Read the rest.



I know, I know. The title to this post is a real shocker. I hope you were sitting down.

Frankly, the effort’s of Congress to dictate foreign policy and war strategy is nothing new in the history of armed conflict and American politics, and virtually all presidents in time of war have had to deal with congressional interference.

The deja vu with this Congress and it’s effort to micro manage defeat using similar Vietnam era style tactics is most disheartening. 3,000,000 Vietnamese were massacred or died in re-education camps because of the American cut and run forced on our troops by the Democratic Congress of the time.

Abandoning Iraq and letting the bloodbath begin isn’t an option for America, a nation rich in law and practice regarding the value of human life. Unless, of course, your a liberal Democrat, with millions of aborted babies under your belt, a burning desire to make suicide as acceptable as getting a drivers license and even putting the deformed out of their misery because of “quality of life” issues. With that record, what’s a few more bodies?

Only the Socialist Left in America wants to cut and run from Iraq, consequences be damned. Why? Because anything even perceived as an American defeat, is a source of glee and pleasure. Anything that damages the reputation, dimishes the influence or injures cohesion or security of the American nation is what these people are all about.

Imagining the lie about “supporting the troops, but against the war” is believable is another example of self delusion and shows an arrogance about the aptitude of their fellow countrymen. No culture, society or nation on earth honors cowards, or those who break their promises. Fighting the enemies of this country at home is every bit as important as fighting those abroad.

Never give up.

Excerpts from The Politico article:

“In 1973, Congress sought to deal with its de facto exclusion by passing, over President Richard Nixon’s veto, a War Powers Resolution. It required the White House to cease hostilities within 60 to 90 days unless Congress authorizes military force or extends the time. Every president since Nixon has viewed the key provisions of the resolution as unconstitutional.”

“During the Korean War, there was hot talk on Capitol Hill of impeaching President Harry Truman for having sacked Gen. Douglas MacArthur for insubordination.”

“As the war went on, it often solicited testimony from both high-ranking and junior officers. It leaked secret testimony to newspapers to sway public opinion. And it repeatedly pressed President Abraham Lincoln, sometimes successfully, to dismiss generals not to its liking.

Shortly before taking on the committee’s chairmanship, Wade wrote a friend that Lincoln’s views on slavery “could only come of one born of poor white trash and educated in a slave state.”

“On numerous occasions, they browbeat the president to remove a general or endorse a piece of legislation they thought was important. They were angered when Lincoln did not give in. They complained about the president’s humor and his penchant for handling conflict by telling anecdotes.”

The Politico is new, but right on top of the facts for now. Read the rest here.

sharia.jpgRight here in Tampa Bay, earlier this week, people met from across the globe to discuss reforming Islam, about bringing an enlightened version to those who suffer opression and brutality at the hands of Sharia, and cultural tyranny in the form of male dominance and violence.

Oddly, Atheists, lesbians, Christians and agnostics were represented at this summit, along with some actual Muslims. Seems a little odd that this group would meet to reform something they don’t adhere to in the first place, but whatever. Also, below is an excerpt from The Times Online and the chairperson for a portion of the event, herself formerly a slave bride to an Afghan Muslim, whom she lived with in Afghanistan.

The point of posting this is the interesting, contorted world view of a feminist, multicultural, anti-Israel, anti-Western culture college professor who meets third world Islamic barbarism and, lo and behold, she has an awakening. Her shock that her radical feminist, Jew hating, anti-American colleagues dumped her for seeing, and telling, the truth is almost laughable, except that her perceptions of the menace mirror my own.

I’m reminded that the Socialist lefts attempts to subvert Western civilization and culture are being made throughout the world. This person is, or was, in that camp, until her epiphany.

Maybe there’s some hope after all.
“Nevertheless, Western intellectual-ideologues, including feminists, have demonised me as a reactionary and racist “Islamophobe” for arguing that Islam, not Israel, is the largest practitioner of both sexual and religious apartheid in the world and that if Westerners do not stand up to this apartheid, morally, economically and militarily, we will not only have the blood of innocents on our hands; we will also be overrun by Sharia in the West. I have been heckled, menaced, never-invited, or disinvited for such heretical ideas — and for denouncing the epidemic of Muslim-on-Muslim violence for which tiny Israel is routinely, unbelievably scapegoated.

However, my views have found favour with the bravest and most enlightened people alive. Leading secular Muslim and ex-Muslim dissidents — from Egypt, Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Pakistan, Syria and exiles from Europe and North America — assembled for the landmark Islamic Summit Conference in Florida and invited me to chair the opening panel on Monday.

According to the chair of the meeting, Ibn Warraq: “What we need now is an age of enlightenment in the Islamic world. Without critical examination of Islam, it will remain dogmatic, fanatical and intolerant and will continue to stifle thought, human rights, individuality, originality and truth.” The conference issued a declaration calling for such a new “Enlightenment”. The declaration views “Islamophobia” as a false allegation, sees a “noble future for Islam as a personal faith, not a political doctrine” and “demands the release of Islam from its captivity to the ambitions of power-hungry men”.

Now is the time for Western intellectuals who claim to be antiracists and committed to human rights to stand with these dissidents. To do so requires that we adopt a universal standard of human rights and abandon our loyalty to multicultural relativism, which justifies, even romanticises, indigenous Islamist barbarism, totalitarian terrorism and the persecution of women, religious minorities, homosexuals and intellectuals. Our abject refusal to judge between civilisation and barbarism, and between enlightened rationalism and theocratic fundamentalism, endangers and condemns the victims of Islamic tyranny.”

Read full artcle here.


From the La Voz de Aztlan website:

What does the immense success of “La Gran Marcha” mean to Mexicanos and other Latinos? It simply means that we now have the numbers, the political will and the organizational skills to direct our own destinies and not be subservient to the White and Jewish power structures. It means that we can now undertake bigger and more significant mass actions to achieve total political and economic liberation…

“Eventually labor union power can merge with the immigrant civil rights and “Immigrant Sanctuary” movements to enable us to either form a new political party or to do heavy duty reforming of the existing Democratic Party. The next and final steps would follow and that is to elect our own governors of all the states within Aztlan.”

“On the issue of the Iraq war, we want our troops withdrawn from Iraq and a negotiated peace with Iran; on the issue of immigration, we want humane and comprehensive immigration reform that will legalize the 12 million undocumented workers; and on the issue of peace in our communities, we want peace among California’s divergent ethnic/racial communities (translated:gangs)”


In 1960, non Hispanic whites made up 82% of the population of Los Angeles County. Forty years later, just 31%, while Hispanics accounted for 44.6%. The number of Mexicans in the Los Angeles area is second only to Mexico City.

Three million people of Mexican ancestry call L.A. County home, and half of all it’s residents, 54%, speak a lauguage other than English at home. They have spanish language television stations, radio stations, newspapers, magazines, books, etc., collect welfare at over 2 times the rate of native born Americans and unless college educated, costs taxpayers on average $30,000-$90,000 over his or her lifetimes. Mexicans here outnumber all other immigrant groups 6 to 1, and Canadians 16 to 1.

The anglo hegemony was an abberation from 1880 to 1960. The Mexican culture was there all along.

California is going home to Mexico, and no one seems to mind except the roughly 100,000 whites and upper middle class blacks that are leaving the state per year. The “reconquista” of the southwestern US is in full swing, and only a few notice, or care.

At least, Texas is fighting back. Thanks Charles

Far out, dude.

Ever wonder why the Left in America seem’s so willing to promote just about anything that furthers legal aid and protection for foreign terrorists?

It’s no coincidence that the Socialist Left and Islamist desires to destroy America make for a cozy partnership. A match made in hell, certainly.

You might enjoy a video reminder of the recent history of Jihad, and another video expressing the connection between modern Islamist ideology and their historical counterparts.

Islam is not really about sawing the heads off of unbelievers, at least not right at first.

An important intermediate step is allowing unbelievers to live in submission to muslims, if a long list of do’s and dont’s are followed to the letter and something called a jizya, or poll tax, is willingly paid and you behave as one who has been subdued. So, technically, you could bribe your way into avoiding death. You might regret your decision, once the myriad of opressive measures were inflicted upon you, but you would still be breathing.

While in this no man’s land of dhimmitude, and paying a prohibitive tax for the pleasure of remaining on Muslim land, you might have second thoughts. Keep in mind, this tax supports Muslim life. The booty from conquered lands was substantial, and motivated much of the agressive warring activities of Islam, while the tax was an ongoing interest payment for putting up with the infidel monkeys and apes in their midst. Booty in warring action’s payed for further such activity.

The next most logical step would be submission to Islam, and forsaking any behavior not specifically aligned with Quranic teachings. However, your never truly accepted as a Muslim, nor a convert, but rather a revert, since according to Islam, everyone is a Muslim, they just don’t know it yet. So, even in this submitted state of an actual Muslim, your never really an insider.

Now we arrive at the beheadings, a favored way to take the lives of those who refuse to submit to Allah. Done properly, this is at best gruesome, but effective for killing, and sends a powerful political message.

So, if anyone says the terrorists want to cut your head off, they’re right. But, historical Islam thought it wiser collecting an income from those they conquered, rather than killing the golden goose of their dhimmi’s.

Nothing has changed. The identical Islam is practiced by fundamentalist Muslims worldwide, with the majority preferring to practice the lukewarm version rather than the historical one, so beheadings are a recent reinstatement, and take place in Saudi Arabia and Iran frequently, along with stoning women to death and chopping off the hands and/or feet of thieves.

Western sensibilities may be offended by these truths, I know I was. With the sweet moniker of the “religion of peace”, the dismissal of Islamist threats, and relegation of terrorists attacks to isolated incidents committed by unstable “youths”, joining those who ignore these realities takes no effort. Do nothing, believe what your told, and presto! No Islamic terrorist threat. Only a handful of “extremists” who hijacked the religion.

I would encourage a little reading, a little study, no imagination necessary. The facts of history speak for themselves.

Belgian Left joins with growing Islamic population



I’m pleased to see 60 Canadian scientists implore their government to withhold billions in tax dollars allocated to implement the Kyoto protocols. Their research shows that, knowing what we do now about Co2 and other “greenhouse gas” emissions, signing on to Kyoto’s regulations weren’t necessary in the first place. The estimated temerature change of 0.0015 degree celcius and a cost of 150 billion dollars relegates this failed boondoggle to the ash heap of history, or so you would think.

Insisting the Canadian government revisit shaky claims of anthropogenic, catastrophric global warming and reel in environmental knee-jerk restrictions caused by junk-science, the group hopes that a sounder platform be constructed of actual, provable scientific investigation and not merely guestimations akin to the previous global scare of an impending ice age, which failed the test of time.

Imagine your whole world view of a condition ending with the literal drowning of billions of people being surmised and solidified by viewing a cartoonish docu-drama produced by a politician whose goal is to become president of the United States, and who wrote a book highlighting the need for the banning of the gasoline combustion engine. Think this guy might want to exaggerate the dark side? Uh, yeah.

The new “green” president would then propose, and see through a willing Congress, environmental strongman legislation and executive signing statements directing massive government intervention into the everyday lives of citizens and Orwellian abuses unlike America has ever seen, all in the name of the “common good” and salvation of mankind.

No way, you say? Has anything the UN supported EVER been good for the US or any free people on this earth? Absolutely not.

I implore any other scientific body to petition their respective governments, insisting federal funds be withheld until REAL science can be applied to this issue. No more pandering to leftists worldwide, itching for control of money and power to implement far reaching, draconian regulation created to thwart commerce and destroy personal freedoms.

In typical, capitalist fashion, odd for a leftist, Dion also had this to say about the MONEY MAKING aspects of climate change exploitation.

Excellent resource for exposing global warming chicanery.

Another global warming exaggeration.

Next Page »