Loony Left Equals Loony Greens - And Vice Versa...

(As if we didn't know.)

Iain Dale spotted this extraordinarily vicious rant by left wing blogger and Labour stooge, Sunny Hundal, earlier this evening:

Look at the people who push global warming denialism: Fox News (enough said), The Telegraph (enough said), The Spectator (recently promoting AIDS denialism), Melanie Phillips (enough said), Christopher Booker (has anyone read his Wikipedia entry recently?), James Delingpole (enough said).

These are the kind of fuckwits (Delingpole, Richard North) who think there’s a conspiracy when their article doesn’t appear on Google News or use Google search hits as example of how big the story is.

Calling them ‘denialists’ is being too kind: they should be abused at every instance for the stupidity they churn out. They should be ridiculed, parodied, cussed, and constantly called out for the idiots they are because they deserve it.

Let the scientists do the science. But outside that world is a media full of bullshit artists who have vested interests in promoting ’scepticism’. The Spectator magazine’s hosting of the AIDS denialism film is just one small example. If we retreat on this war between ideologies by trying to be nice, while all they do is throw vitriol and propaganda, then we’ve already lost... There is no reason to take these people seriously or even off them an ounce of respect. If that means the political debate is charged – so be it.

Desperate.

It seems that this moron is calling on loony greens everywhere to be as "vitriolic" (to use his term), violently offensive and libelous/slanderous as possible wherever and whenever they detect any sign of criticism (or "scepticism" and "denialism" as they prefer to call it in their world of anti-debate) of the whole MMCC scam. But is he saying this in the name of the "Green" movement? Of course not, he's saying in the name of the socialist, labour movement to which he subscribes, which hijacked the Green agenda long ago and turned it into what it is today: a misanthropic, anti-capitalist, post-Soviet redux masquerading as an environmental crusade. It's therefore hardly surprising that the sickening slur "denier" is used so frequently. It deliberately associates critics of the warmist agenda with neo-nazis. (Marxists, socialists and communists always were very good at propaganda, after all. And nothing else.)

My point is that the next time anyone is smeared with the term "denier" in public, by dishonest socialists like Hundal, the answer is to sue for defamation. Immediately. It's that serious. Oh, and there I was wondering why the left has suddenly become so obsessed with the libel laws of Great Britain. Now I know: they want to make it impossible for people to protect themselves against mad watermelons like Hundal, who, once the libel laws of this country have been suitably twisted in their favour, would be able to call anyone anything he liked for any reason he chooses. For that reason, and many others, idiots like Hundal and his ilk, deaf as they are to criticism (mindless doctrinaire socialists always are) and blind as they are to the realities of climate change (it's got bugger all to do with people), can be considered a menace to democracy and a threat to freedom of speech and other inalienable human rights. And they should be treated as such; as loonies.

Unfortunately, they also happen to be calling the shots at the moment. So the peril is real. At least until a cure is found for the thought disease that is causing it.

Incidentally, if any doubt remains in your mind about the connection between post-soviet communists and the modern Green, AGW-pushing bandwagon, read this bizarre, pretty troubling article by "former" committed communist, Bea Campbell, from the Guardian (where else?) a few weeks ago. It's titled, rather unsurprisingly, "Why I turned from red to green."

Here's an extract if you can't face the whole thing:

The Green critique of modernity's Faustian recklessness helps to make sense not only of capitalism but also the tragedies of state socialisms. For progressives, whose politics hover between the centre and the far left, this is decisive.

The communist states of the 20th century did for socialism. I was a dynastic communist – my parents were British Bolsheviks, they were good citizens, and became better when Khrushchev gave permission to criticise Stalinism. All that crashed with the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. They could not relinquish the Soviet Union, and thereafter our family rows were on the terrain of Russia. The worst insult my father could hurl was: "You're just a social democrat!"

I remained a communist until 1989, when it was all over. I was part of the anti-Stalinist, Euro-communist wing. We were clever, caused trouble, caught the imagination, but we lost. Or maybe we failed.

Green ideology represents the reconciliation of production and reproduction – that is what yields sustainability.

See? Once a red loony, now a green loony - but still really a red loony, just daubed with lashings of green propaganda. There's no epiphany, just extreme vanity and extremism. In fact, this person and so many like her are just about as egomaniacal as it's possible for a human being to be without actually regressing fully into some form of narcissistic solipsism; a complete but ecstatic break from reality. But they cling on with their fingernails and the support of like-minded, wrongheaded individuals, who serve merely to service and reinforce their delusions.

And people wonder why I'm doubtful that man made climate change is a real, measurable phenomenon, especially after the Climategate scandal (and the emerging, similar NASA story). Well, not people like the loony Hundal, actually. He just thinks I'm a nazi. Nice - and QED: the man is not sane.

One thing is certain, though, David Cameron might have gone green in the name of saving human beings from their tendency to like to keep warm, but he had better wake up to the fact pretty pronto that he's playing with political fire.

Apology Fatigue

I would say sorry but I can't speak cat

After all this lefty "apology" nonsense for bad stuff that happened long ago, perpretrated by folk who in the main have long since gone the way of the dodo, it seemed likely that there would be something of a backlash against the idiocy, insincerity, mendacity, hypocrisy and futility of these political publicity stunts. Some of the blogs have had a pretty good crack at it today but I especially like this one from the ever-unapologetic Gerald Warner that's just popped up over on the Telegraph's website.

Gordon Brown is set to make a public apology for the Norman Conquest. Last night close aides and Downing Street insiders categorically denied that any such move was being considered, fuelling the growing consensus that a fulsome apology is imminent. One source who requested not to be named said: “Gordon has always felt strongly about the Norman Conquest and its disastrous legacy of hereditary privilege and a class-based society.”

Another Labour insider commented: “The main concern is the trauma still being endured by people of Anglo-Saxon extraction. They lost their language, their social cohesion and their political autonomy as a consequence of this foreign invasion. While England has a long tradition of welcoming asylum seekers and the oppressed, arrogant Norman aristocrats on horseback are quite another proposition. A glance at the Bayeux Tapestry shows the kind of thuggish behaviour in which they indulged. When a King of England is struck in the eye by an arrow it is clear that a coach and horses is being driven through health and safety laws.”

He hastily added that there was no reason whatever why a man with one eye should not rule England successfully for many decades, but repeated his strong condemnation of the Norman invaders: “The Battle of Hastings was an early spree by Bullingdon Club louts.” Climate change campaigners also suggested that man-made global warming may have begun with the Norman Conquest: “All those forges producing chain mail and steel weaponry, not to mention thousands of imported French horses breaking wind – the effect on England’s ecological system must have been devastating.”

Kev Engels, Professor of Historical Studies and Social Inclusion at the University of Brixton, claimed: “Exclusive, class-based terminology such as “serf”, “vassall” and “churl” date back to the events of 1066. You get social alienation due to people with “De” in their names discriminating on racial grounds against the indigenous population. A Marxian interpretation would identify this as the start of colonialism, which also laid the foundations of the class struggle.”

The question that was preoccupying the Westminster village last night was the scale of compensation that would be offered to victims of William the Conqueror. A spokesman for a left-leaning think tank said: “To apologise without allocating adequate resources to victims is meaningless.” He estimated a minimum investment of £3 billion would be needed, to fund resources for outreach, counselling and rehabilitation services.

Political observers agreed that, having ruled out a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, an initiative hostile to Normandy, the nearest outpost of the EU to England, might be a popular stance for Gordon Brown to adopt in the run-up to a general election. A spokesman for the Football Association welcomed the likelihood of an apology, saying: “Hastings was a disaster. Our lads were knackered after a mid-week friendly at Stamford Bridge. They had horrific injury problems and should never have been asked to take to the field that day.” On a more optimistic note he added: “The Norman Conquest was a game of two halves.” Downing Street is still refusing to comment.

Warner clearly has asked himself, "Where will this all end?" The answer to that question is that it's very hard to say, but his witty reductio does give us some clue. Idiot lefties like Brown and his Australian counterpart idiot lefty, Rudd, are capable of just about any level of hypocrisy if they think it will go down well with their socialist constituencies. I just wish they wouldn't do it "on behalf of the British/Australian people." I'm not bloody sorry.

So just where will it all end? My view? Well, you have to follow it through to its logical conclusion. Given all the leftwing hand-wringing about the impact of humanity on global ecology, I suggest that the next official retrospective apology should be to plant and animal life everywhere. The shameful period of human evolution that resulted in us inheriting the status of Top Dog of the Biosphere is a stain on the history of the world, if not the universe.

I've already said sorry to my cat.