EPA’s McCarthy: ‘Every voice needs to be in this discussion’

Of course, we only listen to normal people

h/t Richard Cumming. When he pointed to Jamie Glazov’s article I discovered the McCarthy outrage.

Lots of people have stopped listening to climate science, which observes no warming for 20 years. They are now being exhorted to stop listening to ‘climate deniers’.

US EPA chief Gina McCarthy is spouting insidious totalitarian doctrine hidden beneath a pretended admiration of democracy and camouflaged by appeals to the good of the majority. So she prepares the ground for legal restraints against honest free speech, and someone must point it out. Continue Reading →

Free speech means literally anything you like

That’s its power

If you’re thinking of making an off-colour joke in modern Britain you’d be better off joining ISIS writes Douglas Murray in the Spectator. The point he makes is a good one. Whenever some idiot gets it into their head that it’s the right and proper thing to do to go and join an Islamist death cult in Somalia, Syria or Iraq – fully aware of the brutality that this will entail and of the innocents they may well be required hideously and ruthlessly to murder – we are expected to indulge them as hapless, brainwashed victims: nice, warm, caring, wouldn’t-hurt-a-fly types who were just led astray.

So says the wonderful James Delingpole at Breitbart. Source: Welcome to Modern Britain Where Sexism is a Greater Crime Than Violent Jihadism – Breitbart

Losing your job for making a bad joke or an off-colour joke, or even an offensive joke, is an act of oppression. Continue Reading →

Even an oik has freedoms

Imprisoned just for speaking

A Welsh district judge, John Charles, just barged through ancient legal protections for free speech and gaoled one Liam Stacey for 56 days for offensive tweets — essentially two months in pokey for speaking.

These tweets were obnoxiously filthy but the judge went too far. It should be possible to utter any offensive words in public without fear of arrest or legal sanction. If the words are wrong, if they accuse a person incorrectly, or make allegations without justification, then the speaker should expect to be charged with slander or similar. But so-called “hate speech” — merely insulting a person, organisation, community, city, nation or race gives insufficient grounds to deprive a person of liberty.

Shall it now be unlawful to craft insults or express hatred? Why should we not hate some people? Continue Reading →

Suppression of sceptical views continues

Climate Realists carried a letter from John O’Sullivan on 2 November, claiming ill treatment at the hands of Suite101.com, in terminating their publishing arrangement with him. I note that two of O’Sullivan’s articles are still available at Suite101 but this is his letter:

Friends,

I write to announce my employment with my publishers, Suite101 was terminated today without prior notice or explanation and all my articles published over a two-year period with them are now removed from the Internet. I believe this is in retaliation for my latest article ‘New Satellite Data Contradicts Carbon Dioxide Climate Theory’ revealing the shocking fact that the Japanese ‘IBUKI’ satellite measuring surface carbon dioxide emissions shows that Third World regions are emitting considerably more CO2 than western, industrial nations. Continue Reading →