Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

The Climate Wars to come

Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby C8 » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 10:59:07

This is an article from Bloomberg- Mike Bloomberg is a major suppoorter of renwable energy and finances attempts to shut down coal plants by greens- so this is an article from a "green friendly" site (or at least neutral).

I have bolded those sections that get to the heart of the danger:

Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

By
Megan McArdle
The Competitive Enterprise Institute is getting subpoenaed by the attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands to cough up its communications regarding climate change. The scope of the subpoena is quite broad, covering the period from 1997 to 2007, and includes, according to CEI, “a decade’s worth of communications, emails, statements, drafts, and other documents regarding CEI’s work on climate change and energy policy, including private donor information.”

My first reaction to this news was “Um, wut?” CEI has long denied humans' role in global warming, and I have fairly substantial disagreements with CEI on the issue. However, when last I checked, it was not a criminal matter to disagree with me. It’s a pity, I grant you, but there it is; the law’s the law.

(I pause to note, in the interests of full disclosure, that before we met, my husband briefly worked for CEI as a junior employee. We now return to our regularly scheduled programming.)

Speaking of the law, why on earth is CEI getting subpoenaed? The attorney general, Claude Earl Walker, explains: “We are committed to ensuring a fair and transparent market where consumers can make informed choices about what they buy and from whom. If ExxonMobil has tried to cloud their judgment, we are determined to hold the company accountable.”

That wasn't much of an explanation. It doesn't mention any law that ExxonMobil may have broken. It is also borderline delusional, if Walker believes that ExxonMobil’s statements or non-statements about climate change during the period 1997 to 2007 appreciably affected consumer propensity to stop at a Mobil station, rather than tootling down the road to Shell or Chevron, or giving up their car in favor of walking to work.

State attorneys general including Walker held a press conference last week to talk about the investigation of ExxonMobil and explain their theory of the case. And yet, there sort of wasn’t a theory of the case. They spent a lot of time talking about global warming, and how bad it was, and how much they disliked fossil fuel companies. They threw the word “fraud” around a lot. But the more they talked about it, the more it became clear that what they meant by “fraud” was “advocating for policies that the attorneys general disagreed with.”

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman gave the game away when he explained that they would be pursuing completely different theories in different jurisdictions -- some under pension laws, some consumer protection, some securities fraud. It is traditional, when a crime has actually been committed, to first establish that a crime has occurred, and then identify a perpetrator. When prosecutors start running that process backwards, it’s a pretty good sign that you’re looking at prosecutorial power run amok.

And that approaches certainty when attorneys general start sending subpoenas to think tanks that ExxonMobil might have supported. What exactly would the subpoena prove? That ExxonMobil supported opinions about climate change? That the opinions tended to be congruent with its own interests? That this opinion might have been wrong, and if so, might have encouraged wrong beliefs in others? This is a description of, roughly, every person or organization in the history of the world, not excluding attorneys general. It’s also not illegal. Especially since, as the New York Times points out, “the company published extensive research over decades that largely lined up with mainstream climatology.” This isn’t preventing consumers from buying into a Ponzi scheme; it’s an attempt to criminalize advocacy.

I support action on climate change for the same reason I buy homeowner’s, life and disability insurance: because the potential for catastrophe is large. But that doesn’t mean I’m entitled to drive people who disagree with me from the public square. Climate activists have an unfortunate tendency to try to do just that, trying to brand dissenters as the equivalent of Holocaust deniers.

It's an understandable impulse. It seems easier to shut down dissenters than to persuade people to stop consuming lots and lots of energy-intensive goods and services.

But history has had lots and lots of existentially important debates. If you thought that only the One True Church could save everyone from Hell, the Reformation was the most existentially important debate in human history. If you thought that Communist fifth columnists were plotting to turn the U.S. into Soviet Russia, that was also pretty existentially important. We eventually realized that it was much better to have arguments like these with words, rather than try to suppress one side of them by force of law.

Unfortunately those who wield the law forget that lesson, and we get cases like the CEI subpoena, intended to silence debate by hounding one side. The attorney general doesn't even need to have the law on his side; the process itself can be the punishment, as victims are forced to spend immense amounts on legal fees, and immense time and money on complying with investigations. (And if the law were on the attorney general's side in a case like this, then that’s a terrible law, and it should be overturned.)

Prosecutors know the damage they can do even when they don't have a leg to stand on. The threat of investigation can coerce settlements even in weak cases.

The enemies of the Competitive Enterprise Institute and ExxonMobil should hold their applause. In a liberal democracy, every guerrilla tactic your side invents will eventually be used against you. Imagine a coalition of Republican attorneys general announcing an investigation of companies that have threatened state boycotts over gay-rights issues, and you may get a sense of why this is not such a good precedent to set.

The rule of law, and our norms about free speech, represent a sort of truce between both sides. We all agree to let other people talk, because we don’t want to live in a world where we ourselves are not free to speak. Because we do not want to be silenced by an ambitious prosecutor, we should all be vigilant when ambitious prosecutors try to silence anyone else.


http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2 ... al-warming

This is pretty much close to Dohboi's wet dream of throwing in jail all those who disagree with his climate change views- it is also a very clear sign that the left has little patience with free speech or debate anymore and is more comfortable with dictatorial powers over "the people".

But left wing governments usually fail spectacularly, and when the inevitable happens and a radical right wing government takes over- the nation will have been conditioned to accept a dictatorial prosecution and silencing of dissenters- and the victims will this time be on the left.

But the NY Attorney General is only doing what student left wing agitators do when they disrupt debates and shut down forums that present views they disagree with.

Look at the left - it is the direction dictatorship will come from THIS time. The days of free speech and open debate are numbered.

Stalin would have approved.
User avatar
C8
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1074
Joined: Sun 14 Apr 2013, 09:02:48

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby Lore » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 11:11:55

Freedom of speech to an extent which does not cover endangering others because of it.
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Lore
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Fear Of A Blank Planet

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby ralfy » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 11:17:14

Looks like the opposite of "silence" to me.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5558
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby Lore » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 11:20:05

More like freedom of information to uncover a threat.
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Lore
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Fear Of A Blank Planet

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby Cog » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 11:38:05

Look at what is going on with college campuses right now. Anyone who does not agree with the progressives is effectively silenced. Safe places, hate speech prohibitions, ring a bell with anyone?

Next will come jail, the gulags, and finally the executions. If you are a student of history, this is not an unknown phenomena.

Progressives, if they had the power, would first imprison, then send to a gulag, and then kill every single person who didn't agree with their agenda.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13416
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby Tanada » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 12:25:08

Any time prosecutors, who are after all elected officials seeking publicity, go on a witch hunt it is bad for everyone. It is bad when they do it under color of law, but doing an open ended 'discovery' like this is purely punitive. Nobody short of a Billionaire can afford the administrative and legal expense of one of these 'discovery' fishing expeditions, or effectively fight against it.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17048
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby onlooker » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 13:53:26

I do not necessarily approves of these actions by the prosecution. Having said that I do believe Corporations should be held accountable. They sell products and services which can potentially harm people. They hold immense power because of their wealth. Thus, the government in the interests of the welfare of the common people should serve as watchdog to behavior by companies. Of course, we should not be under the illusion that this investigation will in any way hamper the use and production of Oil. We chose our path, now we do seem to be able to or willing to deviate from said path. You can say we all are culprits but you can also say some are more culpable, like those who search and produce the Oil and even when knowing the harmful longer effects of said Oil, mislead and lie to the public instead of revealing what they know. Enough said.
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10957
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 13:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby Hawkcreek » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 14:22:48

Yes, this all part of a plot by the "blue" side to put us under their thumb, and then kill us if we don't cooperate.
It doesn't strike you as strange that every issue becomes part of the war cry against the other side.
In my view, the enemy are the elite who so cleverly play both sides against the middle, clouding the true issues.
And eventually, when we get that new bloody civil war of red against blue, the winners will be, once again, only the elite.
How about discussing the pros and cons (or illegality or legality of each issue), rather than folding every issue into a red or blue team, rah rah rah theme.
"It don't make no sense that common sense don't make no sense no more"
John Prine
Hawkcreek
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sun 15 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Washington State

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby GHung » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 14:36:02

Seems pretty simple in my view. From the article:

That ExxonMobil supported opinions about climate change? That the opinions tended to be congruent with its own interests? That this opinion might have been wrong, and if so, might have encouraged wrong beliefs in others?


Opinions? If that's the case, I agree that this is a witch hunt. I guess it comes down to whether or not XOM was expressing/supporting an "opinion" or was attempting to suppress FACTS (facts they may have known) about their products' contributions to climate change.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3093
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 16:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby dohboi » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 14:43:31

Scientists have been harassed for years to 'cough up' every scrap of emails, notes, other communications, etc. so that the bozos like those at the Enterprise Institute can go through and cherry pick phrases to make it look like something nefarious was going on (a practice that vt, is apparently still being tricked by).

This keeps top scientist from doing vitally important work, since it is a huge time drain.

It is long past time that people whose main occupation is lying about science and deceiving the public about life-and-death important issues be held to the same standard of openness about what they are doing.

(By the way, I'm glad to hear that I'm still having wet dreams, but I'm a bit nervous about how C8 came to know about them!! :lol: :lol: )
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 19990
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby onlooker » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 16:08:55

And so while some are arguing for the constitutional right of the government and fossil fuel industry to hide their records and what they know and knew about climate change, others are demanding to be heard. Those demanding are young the ones to inherit this Earth. They are suing the Govt. and FF for "These plaintiffs sued the federal government for violating their constitutional rights to life, liberty and property, and their right to essential public trust resources, by permitting, encouraging and otherwise enabling continued exploitation, production and combustion of fossil fuels." So, we have the other side of the coin here. They have the right to be heard and they are crying out that we have spoiled their planet. Freedom of speech was never intended to be freedom to lie and deceive about the future and future welfare of all life on Earth. http://ecowatch.com/2016/04/09/climate-change-case/
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10957
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 13:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby kiwichick » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 16:28:08

+1 onlooker

it is our kids who will have to try and cope with the mess we have handed them .....and yes I definitely include myself......I would have only had 2 kids if I had been better informed about the mess each of us ( in general; I know there are exceptions )....in the "west" have, and are causing
User avatar
kiwichick
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2267
Joined: Sat 02 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Southland New Zealand

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby Lore » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 17:26:20

GHung wrote:Seems pretty simple in my view. From the article:

That ExxonMobil supported opinions about climate change? That the opinions tended to be congruent with its own interests? That this opinion might have been wrong, and if so, might have encouraged wrong beliefs in others?


Opinions? If that's the case, I agree that this is a witch hunt. I guess it comes down to whether or not XOM was expressing/supporting an "opinion" or was attempting to suppress FACTS (facts they may have known) about their products' contributions to climate change.


It was the Bush Administration's opinion that there were WMDs in Iraq. It was a dangerous opinion not based on the facts. They ignored the evidence that none could be found and instead instituted a program that ended in almost two hundred thousand lives taken.

The tobacco industry suppressed the facts for many years and instead put forth, in their opinion, that cigarette smoking was not a hazard to your health. Resulting in an extension of decades of death due to smoking related causes.

So, opinions that hide the facts can be a very dangerous thing. Falsifying, or ignoring facts that jeopardizes others actually makes you an accomplice to the crime.

An opinion that hides the truth is nothing more than a lie.
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Lore
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Fear Of A Blank Planet

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby dohboi » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 18:26:00

Good points, L.

Following up on ol's point: http://billmoyers.com/story/kids-clear- ... e-lawsuit/

Kids Clear Key Hurdle in Their Federal Climate Change Lawsuit

The pathway is cleared for 21 kids to take the Obama administration to court over US climate policies.


Should kids be able to sue for a safe climate? A federal judge just said yes.

Last month, in Eugene, Oregon, a district court heard 21 youth plaintiffs’ arguments as to why their case should proceed to trial. The kids allege that by failing to act on climate change, the US government — including the president and a handful of federal agencies — have violated several of their constitutional rights. As we reported in March:

The complaint alleges violation of the kids’ Fifth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection. By failing to act on climate change, it argues, the government discriminates against youth as a class. Without access to a healthy climate, they’re deprived of their fundamental rights to life, liberty, and property.

The complaint is also built on the public trust doctrine, a carryover from English common law that says a government has the duty to protect certain natural resources and systems on behalf of current and future generations. “It originated with Emperor Justinian in Rome,” Alex Loznak, a 19-year-old plaintiff, explained to the press. “It’s reflected in the Magna Carta, the writings of Thomas Jefferson, and cited in US court decisions dating back to the 1800s.”

Backed by a slew of fossil fuel interests, the Justice Department filed a complaint arguing for the case’s dismissal. Now, with the new decision in hand, the 21 youth plaintiffs will head back to federal court for a proper hearing.

Said lead attorney Philip Gregory in a statement, “This decision is one of the most significant in our nation’s history.”
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 19990
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby onlooker » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 18:37:34

thanks goodness they're are still judges with integrity serving.
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10957
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 13:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby ralfy » Sat 09 Apr 2016, 22:12:35

Related:

"These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America"

http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6- ... ica-2012-6

Given that, it's probably not so much a "witch hunt" than a losing battle.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5558
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby Cid_Yama » Sun 10 Apr 2016, 00:03:52

This is part of the continuing criminal investigation by 16 states and the US Virgin Islands that Exxon-Mobil knowingly misled investors on their annual reports regarding risks to their investments as a result of climate change. That Exxon-Mobil knew the risks and criminally withheld that information from investors.

Exxon-Mobil funded climate change denial through CEI for the years listed under the subpoena.

Nothing new here. Nobody silencing anybody. Exxon-Mobil stopped funding Climate Change Denial through CEI in 2007, when Exxon-Mobil admitted climate change was real.

But Exxon-Mobil's Legal defense IS trying to block the subpoenas, in a bid claiming first amendment rights, that will not legally stand. The 1st Amendment does not protect criminal speech or fraudulent speech. Nor does it protect fraud by omission.

Exxon-Mobil's Legal defense is grasping at straws as they know they have been got. Prosecutors have the annual reports that do not state the potential risk to investment due to climate change, which they are legally required to disclose. They already know that Exxon-Mobil funded climate change denial for years through CEI. Almost certainly there is damning evidence in the material subpoenaed from CEI. All prosecutors are doing now is filling in the gaps and connecting the dots.
"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it." - Patrick Henry

The level of injustice and wrong you endure is directly determined by how much you quietly submit to. Even to the point of extinction.
User avatar
Cid_Yama
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7169
Joined: Sun 27 May 2007, 03:00:00
Location: The Post Peak Oil Historian

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby Satori » Sun 10 Apr 2016, 08:34:40

tobacco companies knew for MANY years just how dangerous their product was
they deliberately obfuscated the issue to maintain profits

seems to me this is the same thing oil companies and other corporate entities have done

no witch hunt
just searching for the truth
User avatar
Satori
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon 29 Oct 2007, 03:00:00

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sun 10 Apr 2016, 09:02:33

Satori wrote:tobacco companies knew for MANY years just how dangerous their product was
they deliberately obfuscated the issue to maintain profits

seems to me this is the same thing oil companies and other corporate entities have done

no witch hunt
just searching for the truth

One big difference between the two examples. If the tobacco companies had been truthful and people stopped smoking the economy would have gone on undisturbed. If Exxon and the other companies had sounded the alarm and stopped selling oil products the economy would have skidded to a halt and a major collapse might well have happened then rather then some time in our future. Which would have been the more irresponsible action?
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 14897
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming

Unread postby Tanada » Sun 10 Apr 2016, 09:15:42

Satori wrote:tobacco companies knew for MANY years just how dangerous their product was
they deliberately obfuscated the issue to maintain profits

seems to me this is the same thing oil companies and other corporate entities have done

no witch hunt
just searching for the truth


Percentage wise fewer tobacco users suffer life long consequences than alcohol consumers. Does that not imply we should be having a slew of class action lawsuits against all alcohol providers?

What about the sugar industry? There is a convincing set of evidence that sugar intake is directly tied to both obesity and diabetes in a vast range of human phenotypes around the world. Shouldn't the sugar cane, sugar beet and corn syrup manufacturers answer for the Obesity and Diabetes epidemic now killing thousands of people every week in the west?
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17048
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Next

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests