Al Gore Lied, James J. Lee Died.
That's the premise of this piece at Big Hollywood (warning: language). Author John Nolte writes:
[M]ost environmentalists are lying liars who know they’re lying. Because if you honestly believe man is destroying the planet, that the apocalypse is nigh, you prepare for it. Most coastal elites are Global Warming believers and yet Global Warming, we’re told, will make the oceans rise to the point that will someday put much of the coast, especially Manhattan underwater. So why aren’t coastal elites moving inland? Why aren’t they pulling a Lex Luthor and buying up all that cheap property that will someday be the new coast?
Strongly worded! And you gotta give him points for the Superman: The Movie reference (it is Big Hollywood), but he goes on to juxtapose Al Gore's movie An Inconvenient Truth with the recent hostage situation at the Discovery Channel headquarters in Maryland.
In that event, gunman James J. Lee (pictured) took several people hostage and, while they made it out alive, he didn't. Police shot him and later safely detonated several explosive devices that he had strapped to his body.
Thing is, Lee was an environmental extremist who claimed on his MySpace page to have been "awakened" by watching Gore's movie.
It's easy, then, to do a variant of the "Bush lied, people died" mantra, as Nolte did in his post at Big Hollywood. But like the anti-Bush mantra, the anti-Gore one is problematic.
I don’t think we can draw any conclusions about Al Gore’s role in an alleged Global Warming conspiracy based on the ramblings of a poor madman.
Should we also waste time analyzing these statements in his Manifesto?
“stopping ALL immigration pollution and the anchor baby filth that follows that”
“fraudulent peace movements”
He gives lots of people different axes to grind. For me the most obvious one is the case for stricter gun control.
More immediately he, his family and victims need our prayers.
“For me the most obvious one is the case for stricter gun control.”
I agree; had an armed, law-abiding citizen with good aim and a steady trigger-pull been there, he might have been able to stop this guy when he first entered the building.
had an armed, law-abiding citizen with good aim and a steady trigger-pull been there, he might have been able to stop this guy when he first entered the building.
Perhaps – if that citizen identified the surprise attack in time and got a clean shot before hostages/human shields were taken. But in other places, law abiding, armed, nervous, quick-trigger-happy citizens will accidentally kill harmless people.
Whenever he was killed he still got his mad manifesto read by millions.
“But in other places, law abiding, armed, nervous, quick-trigger-happy citizens will accidentally kill harmless people.”
Perhaps you can enlighten us with some recent examples.
In the meanwhile, Maryland’s strict gun-control laws did a terrific job of stopping Lee from entering the Discovery HQ with an illegal handgun and bombs.
I was in another state two days ago. As a police officer, I am allowed to carry a gun in any state in the country. But this other state has state-owned liquor stores. There was a sign on the front of the store prohibiting people from possessing guns in the store. As I am not a police officer in that state, I had to leave my gun in my car. I realized that that sign was telling criminals: “Come on in and rob the place; your victims won’t be armed.”
Gun-Control Laws: OSHA for criminals.
“To blame people who are not…advocating violence for the violent acts of others is problematic on all kinds of fronts…”
Amen, Jimmy. When I was a boy, I heard some people, including some of my older relatives, blaming Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. for the violence perpetrated by groups not affiliated with him. It made no sense to me as a 12-year-old; it makes less now.
“Let’s pray for Lee’s soul…”
Amen to that, too.
Bill I am a bit uncomfortable with the idea that an armed, law-abiding citizen with good aim and a steady trigger-pull would be able to assess a situation in a couple of seconds as necessitating the murder or disabling of another citizen.
In the meanwhile, Maryland’s strict gun-control laws did a terrific job of stopping Lee from entering the Discovery HQ with an illegal handgun
Perhaps so. The report I read said that Mr. Lee entered Discovery HQ with “two starter pistols… incapable of firing bullets”. Per Maryland law, as interpreted by Maryland courts and as stated by the Maryland Department of Public Safety, a “starter pistol” is NOT “classified as a regulated firearm” unless “it will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive.”
Sharon;
Your reason, an inability to see that someone acting aggressively with a gun at the beginning of or during a hold up, hostage taking, shootings, etc. is a danger, is a reason for YOU not to have a gun.
Your point, Kelly?
What can one say? I really wish that Mr. Gore had stayed out the fray instead of politicizing the issue before the science were settled (if it is, even now). In my opinion, he has done more harm than good. He is an environmental activist, pure and simple and not a scientist. He is a glorified lobbyist.
If the movie, An Inconvenient Truth, had been made by people who actually understood the limitations of climate studies, the debate might have been a sober one among scientists and the movie would have been quite a different movie. As it is, the issue has bled over into the public. With a scientific literacy of 28% among the general public (and how much greater among politicians?), this was exactly the wrong place to discuss the matter.
Well, the cat is out of the bag but the vast majority of people should either stay out of it or go and learn a little of the scientific method and the real reach of science. That may sound elitist, but something as subtle as global climate change is still an area for specialists and not, Joe-I-saw-a-movie-on-this Q. Public. If people would shut up and let science work, we might have a more definitive answer as to the annthropogenic influence sooner.
The Chicken
I don’t think that sounds at all elitist, Chicken. I think it was Will Rogers who said: We’re all ignorant, just on different subjects.
From science we get definitive answers like Stephen Hawking’s definitive answer that God is not necessary to explain creation.
Point?
I said, “a more definitive answer,” not the definitive answer.
From science we get definitive answers like Stephen Hawking’s definitive answer that God is not necessary to explain creation.
This is Hawking’s opinion.
The Chicken
With a scientific literacy of 28% among the general public…
Out of curiosity, Chicken, where does this figure come from? And how is scientific literacy defined?
“From science we get definitive answers like Stephen Hawking’s definitive answer that God is not necessary to explain creation.”
Marty, this statement demonstrates only that you have no idea what science is or how it actually operates. Stick to World of Warcraft.
Marty, this statement demonstrates only that you have no idea what science is or how it actually operates.
I read it as a sarcastic comment on the wild claims made by scientists like Hawking — who does indeed advocate the idea that his equations ‘prove’ there is no God.
Maybe it’s Hawking who should stick to World of Warcraft. Or Dawkins. Or, you know, any of the other well-known shills for scientism.
Hey, Tim, WoW is at LEAST on part with the general public; possibly a bit higher, since you have to be able to type with greater skill than, oh, the average you tube commenter. (That’s just to log into the game….)
I wondering if some of the folks here and at Jimmy’s link who disagree even bothered to read the article, since he spends most of it saying “we can not blame the movement for this guy’s actions, I’m not even comfortable with folks pointing out that they do it to us” and there’s a full-on screed about how horribly unCatholic the article is for…blaming Gore and The Movement. Much less surprised to see the Media Matters spin as the first response, some things are just too predicable, and MM taking a phrase and ignoring the entire rest of the body of work would fall in that category….
Tim J, It demonstrates no such thing. I was pointing out that scientists cannot be depended on to respect “the real reach of science”, as the Chicken put it. Scientists, including environmental scientists cannot be trusted to stick to the scientific realm without mixing in opinions, religion and politics.
I agree with Chicken that that is Hawking’s opinion, which in this case is outside the realm of his genius, and worth no more than anyone else’s.
You comment demonstrates that you have no idea who you’re talking to and know nothing about me, you just jumped to conclusions. Tom Simon is closer to the mark.
To borrow from Longshanks in the movie “Braveheart”, the problem with science is, it’s full of scientists. They may know more about their specialties, but they are people too.
Out of curiosity, Chicken, where does this figure come from?
There are many articles, such as this.
Also, this.
The Chicken
Most people can be induced to sign a petition calling for the ban of dihydrogen monoxide.
Dihydrogen monoxide is the most underestimated environmental threat we have today!
Dihydrogen monoxide is the most underestimated environmental threat we have today!
Is it worse for you than Aspartame?
The difficulty here is the consequences of the misstep or mis-truth. If Al Gore puts forth a logical argument for climate change and its effects, is he complicit in one man’s decision to take people at gun point in order to advocate that position? If George Bush puts forth a logical argument and uses Colin Powell to sell it with the goal being a declared war to overthrow a government by force, is George Bush complicit in the deaths of soldiers called to combat by the country’s leadership? The more power a leader has, the more dangerous the consequences, and the more complicit they are in the consequences of their misstatements. If a radio personality warns that the current administration is trying to take away America’s guns, and one person in, let’s say, Pittsbugh decides to shoot law enforcement officials and himself, is the radio personality complicit in those deaths as well?
Worse. Far worse.
Part of it is the folly with which people actually install pools of it in their yards. These pools kill more children than guns do!
The National Pool Association has a bumper sticker: “Pools don’t kill children, negligent parents do.”
It is also the most addictive compound known to man. EVERYONE who has tried dihydrogen monoxide even once has immediately become dependent upon it. And EVERYONE who has tried to get off of it has died!
It’s dangerous when inhaled, and in gas or solid form can cause tissue damage on contact.
Bill912
From science we also get things like the Internet and the theories that allow it to run on electricity and for you to type on little letters on a keyboard and have them “magically” appear on your and others’ computer screens.
Not dihydrogen monoxide!
It is the chemical found in more cancer patients than asbestos!
Heavy industries are known to dump thousands of gallons of this straight into our sewers every day!
It is used as the primary industrial coolant for anything from steel foundries to nuclear power plants!
It is a powerful solvent, used in conjunction with the most powerful, and toxic, acids known to man!
Pure dihydrogen monoxide is so dangerous that not only can it corrode metals like steel, but also concrete and limestone!
Even more worrisome, dihydrogen monoxide is a greenhouse gas many times more potent than carbon dioxide!
Please go out and warn others of the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide!
Ed, perhaps you were responding to comments made by someone other than me?
Pure dihydrogen monoxide is so dangerous that not only can it corrode metals like steel, but also concrete and limestone!
Technically, concrete and limestone dissolved, not corrode. Corrosion is an electron transfer process involving metals.
Since everyone who has ever breathed air has died, we ought to ban air for human consumption. This simple little step will end all wars and starvation on the planet, not to mention control population without harming non-mammalian sea life. It will allow the planet to cool and increase the amount of CO2 available for plants.
The Chicken
Hey, Fofier, I can’t post at your blog because only Google accounts are accepted.
Any idea how long the spam shield will be turned on?
The Chicken
It should be accepting Open ID accounts…. Well, it’s open to annon comments, for now.
Mantras such as these are troublesome and problematic. For example, we sometimes see a bumper sticker that says
NO JESUS, NO PEACE
KNOW JESUS, KNOW PEACE
While that is initially reassuring, the problem is that you can fill in any other name (e.g. Allah, Buddha, Stalin, Hitler, etc.), and come to the same conclusion.
This crazed environut shows conclusive proof that the modern environmental movement is part of the culture of death.
Sure, it was good to eliminate pollutants, and the environmental movement did some good. But now they want to eliminate all sources of C02 – including the largest source: Human breathing.
Who cares about the scientific fact that all human activity is 6-8 percent of total CO2 emissions. No environut will dare do something about all those natural sources of CO2. Just kill the people.
Also, dihydrogen monoxide (DHMO) is also in our food and water supply. We got to do something about this dangerous substance 🙂 *tongue in cheek*