We all know the “t”-word. Our President has used it many times, as did former UN Secretary General Annan. It’s – all together now – transparency. Now the “t”-word is promised us in almost every campaign by politicians (and mega-bureaucrats like Kofi) and never delivered, so we’re used to looking at it with a jaundiced eye from them. But scientists, scientists, they are the big brains, the honest ones, the ones who, unlike cheap pols, work for eternity, like Galileo, Copernicus, Einstein.
Anyway, they were, until Climategate came along. Here from the Steve McIntyre’s Climate Audit blog is a breathtakingly short and simple illustration of the values of Dr. Phil Jones, Director of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, from whence all these emails and documents concerning global warming have been lifted.
Phil Jones, Dec 3, 2008:
AdvertisementAbout 2 months ago I deleted loads of emails, so have very little – if anything at all.
Phil Jones, Nov 24, 2009 Guardian
We’ve not deleted any emails or data here at CRU.
Oops. Forget the “T”-word. How about the “P”-word (prevarication)? Or the “BFL” word (big fat liar)?
Now look – I want to be clear. I don’t necessarily disagree that anthropogenic global warming is a danger. I’m beginning to doubt it, but I certainly don’t know. What’s clear, however, is these scientists at CRU don’t know (or aren’t so sure) either. Otherwise they wouldn’t have been so guarded, so deceptive, with their data (what remains of it) for so long. They would have been transparent and shared the data with the skeptics if they were so sure they were right. It’s the scientific thing to do, as we all learned in grammar school, if you’re serious about the truth.
But thus far our President and his crew, not to mention our friends at European Union and the UN, are going along as if this download never happened. It’s full steam ahead to Copenhagen:
The United States, under pressure from other nations as one of the world’s largest greenhouse-gas polluters, will present a target for reducing carbon dioxide emissions at next month’s climate conference in Copenhagen, Obama administration officials said Monday.
The development came as the European Union urged the United States and China to deliver greenhouse gas emissions targets at the long-anticipated summit, saying their delays were hindering global efforts to curb climate change.
What’s confusing here is that we all agree – or most of us- that pollution is bad. What we don’t agree on, now more than ever, is the role of AWG, which is increasingly mysterious the more you read these documents. As Charlie Martin shows us, it’s not just the emails, it’s the data itself that is corrupt. We don’t know what we know. But the world is poised to spend untold billions or trillions on that basis.
I happen to favor energy independence, was once a Sierra Club member (okay, I got sick of them) and currently drive a Prius – and still I think this stinks.
(btw, check out the Guardian interview with Jones: “Some of the emails probably had poorly chosen words and were sent in the heat of the moment, when I was frustrated. I do regret sending some of them. We’ve not deleted any emails or data here at CRU. I would never manipulate the data one bit – I would categorically deny that.” Hint to Jones: Never use the word “categorically.” It’s a dead giveaway.)
Carbon dioxide is not pollution.
I don’t think it matters in the slightest what the politicians, press or zealots say, or don’t say, about this matter at this point. The leaked emails are plain enough for the bulk of the public. This was shoddy science at best, outright fraud at worst.
The AGW group, and I think climatologists and meteorologists in general, have had the reputations badly damaged by this affair. The mythological consensus is no more.
Actually, it SHOULD be the “J” word, for “Jail.” Isn’t that what happened to the Enron guys? And this fraud has been much more expensive to people around the world.
The same crowd which scared a lot of people into
abandoning DDT is also behind this batch of scaremongering.
A lot of it has to deal with this: When more light is shined upon anything, more light is reflected.
The fearmongerers simply do not want to accept it, because they have to be the boss.
“I’m beginning to doubt it, but I certainly don’t know.”
Intellectual agnosticism is not justified regarding the global warming issue. We can absolutely be sure of few things, but the available evidence clearly indicates that these advocates are indulging in gross exaggerations. This is especially true of the possible harm a few added degrees of temperature might cause to the planet. One can actually argue that such an increase might be a good thing. It is safe to claim that there really is no such thing as reasonable argument supporting the extreme position on anthropogenic global warming.
“But the world is poised to spend untold billions or trillions on that basis.”
That’s no longer accurate. Saner heads will prevail and put a stop to this nonsense. Recent polls show almost a complete collapse in American public support for these draconian plans. Only the bluest of legislators will dare push them. Purple and red state politicians are running for the hills.
I disagree with David Thomson that the Demogogues have given up on using the GW “crisis”. They don’t give up ever on anything, no matter how seemingly unpopular for the fact that the public’s stupidity has no limits. It’s why Demogogues always succeed. Name me a real Demogogue (not shadowy Rasputins) that, after capturing popular imagination, didn’t succeed.
It’s not over until the wells are pumping offshore and in ANWR.
Here is how evidence of AGW is evidently cooked up (from a Keith “Hockey Stick” Briffa’s computer code released from CRU):
http://i49.tinypic.com/m9vcxv.jpg
Here is a temperature chart of East Anglia where CRU is located:
http://i45.tinypic.com/iwq8a1.jpg
Here is a simpler procedure to “hide the decline”:
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/mk8113.jpg
Dec. 3 2008:
“The inadvertent email I sent last month has led to a Data Protection Act request sent by
a certain Canadian [Steve of ClimateAudit.org] , saying that the email maligned his scientific credibility with his
peers! If he pays 10 pounds (which he hasn’t yet) I am supposed to go through my emails
and he can get anything I’ve written about him. About 2 months ago I deleted loads of
emails, so have very little – if anything at all.”
- Phil Jones, director of CRU
The good news is that any promise Obama makes in Copenhagen will be completely empty. Just like all of this other promises.
“I would never manipulate the data one bit – I would categorically deny that.”
I have no doubt that he is speaking the absolute truth. In reality, he does not manipulate the data. Rather, he pays some poor programmer, aka Harry Readme, to manipulate the data.
I partially agree with pelaut, in that the war with the AGW zealots is hardly over. But while demagogues may succeed in the short term, they can be defeated when it is clear they have lost the moral high ground. This is starting to happen.
A lasting victory requires not merely pointing out the dishonesty of the AGW “scientists”, but challenging the moral premise at the root of environmentalism: the notion that untouched nature is good, while human technology and progress is evil. IOW, we need to challenge what Ayn Rand called the “anti-industrial revolution.”
Yeah, if they do give up it’s only temporary. World-wide climate issues are too good a vehicle for one-world government or other trans-national meddling to be permanently laid aside.
Name me a real Demogogue (not shadowy Rasputins) that, after capturing popular imagination, didn’t succeed.
I don’t know why, but the first one that popped into my mind is Jesse Jackson. In 1984, he basically ruled the DNC convention and, as you put it, captured popular imagination.
20 years hence, I’d say he’s failed pretty thoroughly and continues to place one foot after another in his mouth. He’s a punch-line. A walking cliche.
“Intellectual agnosticism is not justified regarding the global warming issue.”
I agree — the whole AWG movement is a hoax, plain and simple. The globe may resume warming in the future, but not because of anything we do.
Pollution is a problem we have been dealing with and should continue to address — but giving ourselves over to the notion that we can regulate the temperature of the entire earth? What crap.
It’s amazing that this lie’s endured for as long as it has, it’s so nakedly idiotic.
There is more than enough good evidence to nullify the CO2-warming hypothesis. The recent 10-15 year plateau/cooling trend as CO2 levels have increased (as one example of many) should kill the current AGW models. The exposed communications and, more important, computer codes seem to indicate more than “exaggeration.” These scientists appear (if the veracity of the revealed information is verified) to have disgraced themselves and their profession by selective use of data and attempts to stifle genuine discussion. They should not be permitted to publish peer reviewed work anything, anywhere for an extended period, and not permitted to review anyone elses’ work.
I know a lot of you think this means the end of the draconian new rules, but you’re dreaming. The media will simply not pick it up…and aside from the tiny percentage of people who hunt for news beyond the MSM, most people will never know. Even if they do, there is nothing we can do to stop it. The pols have alredy decided what to do and they will do it. Obama has the whole machinery of the US to do exactly what he wants to do. He will sign the treaties, he willbind us to them, and we will complain and whine, but do nothing.
The die is cast, the fix is in, and we are not going to get out of this.
“I disagree with David Thomson that the Demogogues have given up on using the GW “crisis”.
You are half right. The progressives of all stripes will never give up on their goal of becoming soft totalitarians. This may perhaps be their number one motivation for getting out of bed in the morning. It defines them existentially and the rewards are high if they ever achieve their aims. But the American public is realizing that the global warming crusade can no longer be rationally defended. The polls show a major shift from a year earlier. The progressive will have to find another bandwagon to jump on. The only politicians who will dare to continue pushing this particular nonsense are those safely ensconced in overwhelmingly blue areas.
“Intellectual agnosticism is not justified regarding the global warming issue.”
I’ll become an agnostic on this issue when someone can demonstrate to me with REAL data exactly how man, or one of his evil creations such as the SUV, McMansions, cruise ships, planes, or any combination thereof, caused the Mideval Warming Period. Greenland was called Greenland by the Vikings for a reason.
When you get your cup of coffee and step out on the deck on a cold morning, which way do you face? Towards the nearest SUV? Of course not. You face towards the sun because the sun is the source of all heat on this earth- leaving volcanoes out of it. If the sun went away, there would be absolutely no Global Warming, correct? You are now ready for the obvious conclusion that the cycles of the sun, its natural ebbing and flowing, is THE source of “climate change”, and that, paraphrasing Michael Crichton’s prolog (which EVERYONE should read) to Jurassic Park, we flatter ourselves to think otherwise.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2572842/Prologue-to-Jurassic-Park-by-Michael-Crichton
“Intellectual agnosticism is not justified regarding the global warming issue.”
I’ll become an agnostic on this issue when someone can demonstrate to me with REAL data exactly how man, or one of his evil creations such as the SUV, McMansions, cruise ships, air planes, or any combination thereof, caused the Midieval Warm Period. Greenland was called Greenland by the Vikings for a reason.
When you get your cup of coffee and step out on the deck on a cold morning, which way do you face? Towards the nearest SUV? Of course not. You face towards the sun because the sun is the source of all heat on this earth- leaving volcanoes out of it. If the sun went away, there would be absolutely no Global Warming, correct? You are now ready for the obvious conclusion that the cycles of the sun, its natural ebbing and flowing, is THE source of “climate change”, and that, paraphrasing Michael Crichton’s prolog (which EVERYONE should read) to Jurassic Park, we flatter ourselves to think otherwise.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2572842/Prologue-to-Jurassic-Park-by-Michael-Crichton
This strikes me a lot like the run up to the Iraq war. People (supposed experts in the field of study) telling politicians what the want to hear in order to implement a policy. Just exchange the words:
Intelligence analyst = Climatologist
Weapons of Mass Destruction = Global Warming
Iraq War = Cap and Trade
George Bush = Al Gore
There was a consensus that Iraq had stockpiles of WMD.
There was a consensus on AGW.
The word “consensus” is now a four letter word.
Deciding whether AGW is “real” or not has become a secondary issue.
It was never properly vetted, the new style of the old media, is to take an issue that tilts toward the leftist end game goalpost and then rig the outcome of the contest.
Running a leftist candidate? Fine. The playing field will be so tilted in your favor, your opponent will be forever running up a steep hill, so steep, in fact, that he will be out of breath in the first few yards.
You, dear comrade, will always be able to glide downhill.
The propagandizing of every issue will be replete with distortions, hidden key factors, unfair smears against your opponent, photoshopped pictures of them with demonizing and glowing red eyes, staged events and all manner of misfeasance and malfeasance committed on your behalf.
None of your candidates will be vetted, even at the most basic or remedial of qualifications. Your opponents will have their children…and their children’s children…electron microscope probed.
Have an issue you want jammed down the throats of taxpayers? It will be scrubbed of even the mildest critique and fueled with “testimonials” from any B list actor you can name.
Commit larceny, theft, tax evasion, grope a few employees, drive a naked mistress off a bridge? No problem. You will be covered and then lionized as “champion of the people”.
Vote Republican…or even “moderate” on national defense? Don’t forget to pay a parking ticket. You will be torn to shreds.
Global warming is a leftist tinker toy. It’s a way for nanny totalitarianism (at times there is nothing “soft” about it) to flex its muscles and to give its propaganda arm some puppet strings to pull.
It’s a nice subject matter for prizes and awards for comrade compliance and adherence to the “message” to be handed out. Nobel, EMMY or Oscar…the leftist “gold star” for obedience.
One can’t be agnostic about the underlying issue. The playing field is so slanted, science is not immune from its tilt. Nothing you read, no news you get, no information from the polluted information stream…is trustworthy. Not even the box scores are worth reading any longer. It’s time to quit killing trees and start sewing the seeds of truth and integrity in this land of ours once again.
“What’s clear, however, is these scientists at CRU don’t know (or aren’t so sure) either.”
Really Roger? They don’t know! They falsified data that were making one case to produce data that were making another case. That knew what the data were producing and knew it wasn’t what that wanted or they would not have changed the data. You remind me of a referee in a professional wrestling match. You’re the only observer in the stadium that can’t see the villain engaged in illegal behaviour.
“sowing” the seeds…funny how the mind works while blogging…yeesh.
Ah, the right wing cry for transparency. {Btw, do we know to this day the names of those Cheney met with to set our energy policy?)
Do we know who Cheney met with? No more than we know who Kennedy and Kerry met with, as enemies of state during a time of war.
The cry for transparency shouldn’t be a left or right issue. But to leftists…their is an “us” and “them”…and the “us” isn’t America.
Somewhere, the awesome Michael Crichton is smiling, and shaking his head.
“Ah, the right wing cry for transparency. {Btw, do we know to this day the names of those Cheney met with to set our energy policy?)”
Ah good point, but a bit obscure. Does that mean fradulent data invalidates AGW or validates it?
“In science, as elsewhere, use of the soundest methods does not bestow a guarantee that viable theory will accrue. Nor, it should be said, does improper method, even combined with the lowest of motives, altogether preclude arrival at truth. But it makes it very unlikely.”
W.V. Quine, J.S. Ullian, The Web of Belief
Remember, folks, we are dealing with Liberals here. It will not be categorized as fraud, lies or deceit because it was done with the best of intententions. Liberals always mean well! Thats why they always get away with such shennanigans.
Housing crisis, Wall street swindle, GW, Nasa tapes over MOon Landing, JFK, WMD etc. and to cap it all off the UN + Cap & Trade. I want to see ALL the hard drives and files of all these events. This all makes sense to me now, there is no denying a pattern in this. What about NWO now? Just another myth?
All that’s missing is Dan Rather proclaiming that “even if the data are fabricated, the results are true.”
I am surprised that David Thomson is so confident that a sufficient number of voters are having increasing doubt about the authenticity of the case for AGW, and that saner heads will prevail to prevent Obama from moving aggressively. The much higher percentage of objectors to his HealthCare legislation has not deterred him from ramming it through.
This Maoist hoax of an Administration is so fully committed to doing everything possible to impose Soviet-style Socialism while they have control of Congress that public opinion counts for zilch. What does it take to convince even Democrats that the Chicago/Ayer/Alinsky cadre has nothing but contempt for America and American citizens, is power-mad, dedicated to ruthless destruction of our free-enterprise system.
We’re dealing with a Lysenko mind-set – science at the command of The State. There will be no compromise by the Red House on AGW – Al Gore style.
“The much higher percentage of objectors to his HealthCare legislation has not deterred him from ramming it through.”
Barack obama and the safely ensconced blue state legislators will continue trying to ram “ram it through.” It’s the purple and red ones whose political lives are in jeopardy that will save the day. Joe Lieberman is behaving in a pragmatic and advantageous manner. His opposition to the so-called public option probably dooms the bill—and empowers him politically. Harry Reid probably already realizes that he is a goner in Nevada, and is getting ready to land a lucrative lobbyist position. Still, there are only so many of those jobs available. Obama doesn’t give a damn. He senses that he is only a one term president. Heck, Obama might as well go for broke. What does he have to lose?
We are a witnessing an unprecedented struggle between the purple and red staters vs. the blue staters. It is my adamant suspicion that the Democrats will no longer be a national party for the forseeable future. They will only increase their strength in the blue areas which will like get even bluer. Their red and purple state voters will continue to move to the redder states—leaving the blue staters to fend for themselves.
Why are the populace being totally ignored as these politicians push through these crazy bills – its appalling!
AGW is a religion of the left whose other god Karl Marx has been proven to be a false god. The Greens in Europe and their partners in the US just substituted another
religion. After this latest fraud they will find another god to worship. If you don’t
believe in god you’ll believe in anything.
To: #13. Scott M:
Pretty good example, but there was also Governor Huey Long of LA. (The “Kingpin”) He was a hugely popular demagogue in the 1930′s who was successful at implementing his “reforms” on behalf of what he termed the “little people” up until the point he was shot dead at the state capitol in 1935.
#5: “It’s not over until the wells are pumping offshore and in ANWR.”
I agree. Oil prices started to go back up immediatly after Obama was elected because the oil producers and markets knew that US coastal oil, ANWAR and shale oil projects could not go forward. So the reason you are paying $2.70 for gas instead of $1.50 is directly because the climage alarmists and hoaxers are in charge.
Roger – You say that “pollution is bad.” That has the implication it should be eliminated. But if the benefits of the thing causing the pollution outweigh the costs of eliminating that thing, they we should continue to pollute (up until the marginal cost of the pollution equal the marginal benefit of the pollution). When it comes to the purported AGW, I have seen many benefits since it purportedly began – more crop yields, longer lives, better living, elimination of pollution from horses, reduction in the number of trees cut down for heating, spreading wealth, etc. In this entire controversy, it seems that the cost/benefit argument is being ignored.
Dave Thomson @ #37 – Don’t put too much stock in Lieberman. He talks the talk but rarely walks the walk.
Many of my liberal colleagues at school believe in the “soft” totalitarianism of a nanny-state. It’s based on idealism unchanged since their youth. Our current president used idealism during his campaign to manipulate the electorate, but he is no idealist. Few politicians are.
Liberals fail to understand that “soft” only lasts until someone ruthless enough, like a Joseph Stalin, comes along to seize state power for his own ends. Barack Obama is no Joe Stalin, but you can bet that such people exist in his circle of advisors who would be if they got the chance. Power is a magnet for such people.
Nobody who values the truth can afford to be an agnostic on AGW. It’s a gambit by unelected bureaucrats to put more power in their own hands. If you look at the Lisbon Treaty, you can see that the danger has now become transnational. That should frighten every American because this cabal has no loyalty to us, or any constituency for that matter, other than their own left-wing oligarchy. Their methods reveal them quite clearly as a criminal syndicate, so any talk of “transparency” is rather a joke.
Freedom loving people must fight until this threat is completely and utterly defeated. That will eventually include dissolving the United Nations. The institution created to defend freedom is now a threat to the very freedoms it was chartered to protect. It’s nothing more now than a nest of criminals with fancy bureaucratic titles.
I’m talking about nothing less than the restoration of the American Republic before it’s too late. The 2010 election might stem the tide, but I don’t believe the totalitarians will honor the results, at least not in spirit. Losing political office means very little when you can continue the looting from an office on K Street. We need to put an end to revolving door government as well. I fear none of what I suggest will occur without the threat of force, even maybe the actual use of force before it all shakes out.
Okay, so I’m either a kook or a lone voice in the wilderness. I can live with it.
Paules, you are not only not a lone voice you are fast becoming part of a majority. The frustration and anger continues to grow and spread and as it spreads even the uninformed are becoming restless. My mind is already on 2010 and how after we take back the Congress, how will we make the newly elected undo the harm done. I’m talking revolutionary actions by elected officials. If they don’t comply it’s out on the street.
I am non-liberal, non-conservative, non-leftist, non-right-wing, non-centrist, non-libertarian, non-moderate, non-anarchist, non-green, non-capitalist, non-communist, non-socialist, and not any kind of -ist, and not any kind of -arian.
I love how people all over the internet are picking up on the climate fraud info. Yet I am mystified by how someone could think, “Yeah, this really does prove how evil liberals are.” As if the whole conservative-versus-liberal political setup were anything but a puppet show, with the same crew of puppeteers managing both of the (fictitiously opposite) ‘sides’.
Way back in the late ’50s my grandfather thought pro wrestling was REAL! Since then I think everyone without exception has discovered that pro wrestling is a highly scripted presentation. Apparently, however, many people have yet to make that exact same discovery about politics.
So now, people see the reality of these highly accredited scientists manipulating their data and gaming their own predictive models, in the service of the new globalism — and people take that as new-found evidence of their own political ‘side’ being right, and the other ‘side’ being wrong. When the whole political system is thoroughly controlled, manipulated, and corrupted, and the control, manipulation, and corruption permeate their own ‘side’ as well.
In case anyone reading this thinks I’m actually a liberal and ashamed to admit it, I did vote for Obama (and would never do it again) — and — I did vote for Reagan the first time (and would never do it again if he were still viable).
Piltdown Man all over again…
AGW is no more valid than Cold Fusion until such time as the results are independently replicated. Of course, that can only happen with the raw dataset. Science doesn’t work on consensus because science is not a popularity contest. Science is based on independent verification of results by a variety of researchers.
In real science, you keep your raw data. With the raw data and a record of data processing, you can replicate any interim data set as well as the final results. Not to mention, the raw data may in the future be useful for other research with different processing.
If the raw data is missing, these so called researchers are either frauds or incompetent. If they lost or purposely deleted the raw data, they destroyed an asset that cost millions of dollars to create. It is apparent that neither the researchers or the UEA should ever be given control over the original copies of raw data sets.
So what will be the fall-out from the leaked East Anglia CRU files? What happens when politically connected scientists blatantly manipulate data to buttress a flawed hypothesis: that increasing CO2 concentrations in our atmosphere drive increases in global temperatures – when in fact the inverse is true. Now that the hoax has been exposed through their own research documents and communications, the narrative will become an exercise in the dissembling of culpability by the principles, to be followed by the inevitable claims of victimhood.
There should be no quarter spared in aggressively pursuing the perpetrators at every level in order to expose those who have participated in a conspiracy to enrich themselves through the manipulation of data and research. And with these leaked East Anglia CRU documents providing a basis for further investigation, it would appear that the content developed for the United Nations IPCC TAR and AR4 reports is now hopelessly compromised.
Imagine! – We are one step away from levying a tax on the emissions of CO2 worldwide; a tax that each and every consumer will pay through the increased cost of producing everything we buy. The EPA is on the verge of rendering an endangerment finding on a gas that is an essential building block to all plant life on the globe based on what appears to be falsified data. Carbon Dioxide is a gas that is soluble in water, and one that forms the very base of the food chain in our oceans; it is a compound that each and every living mammal on the planet exhales as part of its very existence. And yet a group of scientists, who for purely self-serving and political reasons, embark on a crusade to manufacture evidence that CO2 is the hobgoblin of greenhouse gases, when in fact all life forms are inherently dependent on its existence.
How many politicians have blindly signed onto invasive and misguided regulations designed to label CO2 emissions as causative to AGW in response to apocalyptic scenarios pushed by Special Interest and the Environmental Lobby, based primarily on the manufactured CRU research.
The selective and purely partisan consideration demonstrated by editors of peer-reviewed journals, willfully rejecting dissenting opinion in favor of sensational headlines, and the banishment of objective experts and opinions to the scientific equivalent of Botany Bay has been unforgivable.
What is the sum total of tax-payer funds on a global scale committed to a fraudulent premise based on falsified data. Do the ends justify the means? – I’m sure there are those who believe so! But is this to become the philosophy of our scientific method.
The virtue of scientific endeavor must remain paramount and therefore the entire community must be held to the highest of standards. There can be absolutely no compromise on the manipulation of data or the scientific method – and for those who breech the protocols and embark on the path of manufacturing results – justice must be swift and uncompromising. To do anything less than issue a ‘scarlet letter’ to those who would perpetrate fraud on a scale such as this would border on criminal itself.
The integrity of the Scientific Process needs to be restored and the first step requires a purging of the ranks to excise the taint; followed by the aggressive prosecution of the principles so that examples of harsh sanctions and consequences are well documented for those who might contemplate embarking down a similar path.
In all the labs I took in school, we weren’t supposed to tear pages out of our lab books. If we made mistakes, we were told to cross them out. Even our mistakes were supposed to be transparent!
Why does this data even need to be hacked? The policies could affect our lives so drastically that every single bit of the data should be completely available to the public on the internet, along with every single equation that is being used. It should be able to be scrutinized by everyone from the PhD down to the budding 4th grade climatologist. If not, then it is not science–it is something else.
“Dave Thomson @ #37 – Don’t put too much stock in Lieberman. He talks the talk but rarely walks the walk.”
I am counting on joe Lieberman’s own self interest. Opposing the Obama administration will boost his moderate image. He will be perceived as the true maverick.
Global Warming is a Hoax Perpetrating a Fraud Based on a Lie to Establish Control Over The Unknowing.
Don’t you feel foolish now?
Sen. Lieberman has not merely taken a stand, he has anchored himself to it, in very plain language.
H/T Big Lizards
WSJ: