Slashdot Mirror
Heartland Institute Threatens To Sue Anyone Who Comments On Leaked Documents
Layzej writes "Bloggers around the world have been commenting on recently leaked Heartland Institute documents that reveal their internal strategies to discredit climate science. These posters are now under threat of legal action. According to the Heartland Institute 'the individuals who have commented so far on these documents did not wait for Heartland to confirm or deny the authenticity of the documents. We believe their actions constitute civil and possibly criminal offenses for which we plan to pursue charges and collect payment for damages'"
If the documents are false they were talking about someone else and it's good for them in the long run because they'll have lots of independents to point to and say "these people are the cause of all this!" But if they are real then they're only going to make it look like they're trying to bury the truth (which would, in fact, be the case) and it can only go against them.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
we plan to pursue charges and collect payment for damages, including damages to our reputation.
lol
you guys are fundies. your rep is what it is, memos or no memos.
enjoy your 'moment of babs', you losers.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Strangely, there don't seem to be many comments on the subject of "Heartland Institute Threatens To Sue Anyone Who Comments...".
Their view of law is very similar to their view of science.
Of course, it all those that published the documents now cower in fear, then mere posturing can be quite effective. Manipulating emotions (as they do not have any rational arguments at all) is, after all, a specialty of this truly and utterly evil organization.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Hiring Barbara Streissand as a legal consultant was not their smartest move.
'the individuals who have commented so far on these documents did not wait for Heartland to confirm or deny the authenticity of the documents.
well I guess that confirms the authenticity now
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
Even if they were written by his holiness Satan himself, I don't get how that would stop me from 'commenting' on them!
Go ahead. Make my day. Sue on that basis. Let me make some popcorn.
My opinion is that if these documents are true then Heartland Institute should be dragged across burning hot coals and their stomachs roasted and eaten.
"Its mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems."
The most fascinating thing about this is the general hypocrisy involved. Whenever the whole "ClimateGate" matter occurred, Heartland was at the front of trumpeting the documents from that (which incidentally turned out to be utterly benign), with zero concern about the ethics of taking confidential documents from other people using hacking. Yet now, when the same thing happens to them, they use every bit of the legal system to go after not just the people who actually did do it but anyone who is then commenting or reproducing the documents. Really charming behavior.
The critical detail missing from the original post is that Heartland claims that one of the documents in question - the "incriminating" one - is a forgery. Unlike some other recent leaks - any Wikileaks scandal and Climategate, for example, the authenticity of the documents is in question. If the docs have been faked, it's an important change in the context.
How should an organization (or individual) respond to something falsely attributed to them?
Can't wait for the letter from the legal department of these science hating fuckers. Feeling lonely.
Because it worked so well for Scientology.Yeah, I can't see this going wrong in any way at all.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
The best way to win in the court room is to prove a witness has a history of lying. This begs the question, "Who from Heartland could be a credible witness"?
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
The Heartland Institute didn't find it necessary for following this protocol for commenting on leaked documents when it came to Climategate.
everyone to comment on it! Where is the FB group? or where is published link so that I can refer to the referenced blog in a status update. it's about time that /. realized that it has a moral duty to combat stuff like this. without organization, ACTA would still be a huge deal.
...assholes. They are kock connected to. I would if anon would do a group mob hit buy?
As opposed to Democrats? Some of us want to kick both parties out of our government.
Palm trees and 8
The "smoking gun" memo is most likely faked, see Megan McArdle's analysis at http://www.theatlantic.com/megan-mcardle/
"methinks the lady doth protest too much"
if the documents were fake, they wouldn't elicit such a strong reaction. therefore, the documents are real
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
*letters omitted to protect sensitive but uninformed Slashdot readers from the effects of a Google search.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
I'd like to comment on your comment. They are going to sue anyone with the initials "AC". I feel good commenting on this because, according to the Heartland site, they support "Ideas That Empower People". They also admit that some of the stolen documents are genuine. Why not just claim that everything made public is a fabrication?
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
Well, to be fair, the Democrats are only slightly better... And are in bed with the RIAA and the MPIAA. (Among other things.)
It's really a matter of 'who will do the least damage to the country', not 'who will make the country better'.
(Personally, I refuse to vote for either party, but I know that it's a vain hope that my vote will make any difference.)
'Sensible' is a curse word.
And to make sure that there's some substance:
My read on the documents is that they provide conclusive proof that the Heartland Institute promoted systematic criminal fraud, corrupted science and effectively engaged in treasonous activity.
There. Now sue me.
Check your premises.
Presumably they have the same attitude to the leaked University of East Anglia emails, and have campaigned to have the people responsible for the leak, and the many, many denialists who misrepresented their contents, taken to court.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
Just remember - power abhors a vacuum. Maybe you're right to want to kick both out (as I'm sometimes inclined), but if the power structure of government is torn down, others will move quickly to fill that void. And the power poised at this time is corporate power, which when allowed to be unchecked is not controlled by the invisible hand, but rather, becomes an heriditary feudalistic system.
Yeah, they're corrupt as all getup. But when the question is tear it all down or try to fix what we've got, and tearing it all down opens things up to even worse scenarios, one is only left with trying to find a way to fix what is.
At least, until it gets so bad that everyone takes to the streets and we wind up shooting each other until the rage is burned out and the next generation of politicians of some stripe take the reigns.
Check your premises.
I would seem that the Heartland institute is a truly corrupt entity. The Heartland institute cannot expect to stifle discussion of their seemingly corrupt behaviour. The Heartland institute must not have heard of the Streisand Effect. Maybe the Heartland institute should get a a clue and stop trying to squelch discussion. Its funny that the Heartland institute is trying to squelch speech yet the Heartland institute claims to be for free speech. The Heartland institutewere at the front of the line waving internal documents of climate scientists. Yet The Heartland institute is now threatening to sue anyone who discusses their internal Documents. Such pathetic doublestandards highlight the hypocrisy of the Heartland institute A poster child for corruption.
So sue me. If the district court judges here can stop laughing long enough, they'll sanction your lawyer and award me costs.
FUCK YOU HEARTLAND INSTITUTE. FUCK YOU. FUCK YOU. FUCK. YOU.
Whew... Now that that is off my chest...
This is completely unacceptable. We really ought to have laws in place to smack down people that try to use the legal system to suppress protected speech -- this type of prosecution, regardless of the ultimate outcome, causes great harm to the people that are caught up in it. It can cost tens of thousands of dollars to defend yourself, which is financially ruinous to the average person. This creates a chilling effect on free speech, which we really cannot allow if we want to remain free. I honestly believe that the people from the Heartland Institute belong behind bars for even attempting such a thing. So, in short, fuck off Heartland Institute. Keep your shit-digging hands off of my civil liberties. Even if you weren't a braindead anti-science piece of shit of an organization, I would think that it is time for you to go. The fact that everything your institute stands for is a huge, fat, retarded lie does not help your case.
To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
Hi, I'm Anonymous Coward and I've been posting to slashdot from the very beginning.
However you lot have just become too fucking old. You've lost your idealism, and become shitty old men, which is why I'm moving to Reddit.
At first I was concerned by the lack of editors, but it's not like the editors here are worth a damn, and the new censorship system is just unacceptable. The mod system doesn't even go up to 11.
Well, it's been fun but fuck you all. And your mothers.
Good bye sirs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation
Even worse, this isn't even the lawsuit, but the threat of the lawsuit. Does that count as racketeering?
Come at me bro.
As it turns out, we do know what burden of proof is. We know that you have it. And I am prepared and willing to watch yourself just try to violate the axiom of non-contradiction. Either they're your documents or they're not.
See there is this thing called the first amendment...
all people at the institute rim goats and kiss underage boys. climate science is as false as my statement
Slanderous nonsense! Everyone knows they kiss goats and rim underage boys.
Similar to the upcoming US election results
Shot in a known nonlethal way. Bah. Many sociopaths would do that if it means they get what they want.
Here's how to really be commander-in-chief, risk your life on the line and lead the soldiers out to battle in spirit:
http://slashdot.org/journal/208853/how-to-reduce-unwanted-wars
That would make even sociopaths think harder before telling others to put life and limb on the line. When you send soldiers to war you're not sending them to be shot in nonlethal parts of their bodies.
OK, suppose everything Heartland says about the documents is true: someone leaked a bunch of real documents, and slipped a bogus "smoking gun" memo in there.
Any PR firm worth its salt could have a field day with that, portraying the Heartland Institute as the victim. Why would they then ruin it by making ridiculous statements implying it's an individual's legal obligation to fact check a document before commenting on it? Do they just have an institutional need to twirl their evil mustache?
There have been plenty of places that have shown the document is a false.
Here is one from a liberal source so some of you will not automatically ignore the truth http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/02/leaked-docs-from-heartland-institute-cause-a-stir-but-is-one-a-fake/253165/
we plan to pursue charges and collect payment for damages, including damages to our reputation.
Translation: we're going to sue everyone we possibly can, because the papers were correct, our position is publicly indefensible, and the only resource we have is lawyers and money to threaten people with like mafia leg-breakers.
This from the same money-laundering front group (I call them this as they REFUSE to disclose their donor list) who commissioned bogus "studies" to try to claim cigarette smoke isn't dangerous.
At least, until it gets so bad that everyone takes to the streets and we wind up shooting each other until the rage is burned out and a Dictator of some stripe takes the reins.
Fixed that for you.
When you have a violent revolution, the odds are the person or group willing AND capable of exerting the most violence will rise to the top. Once they rise to the top, they are unlikely to give up their power or hold democratic elections. At which point who in the country can kick them out? They already have proven to be capable of the most violence.
And that's why Communist revolutions end up as dictatorships - the Communist Manifesto has violence as part of the implementation plan. When the process of selecting your leaders is not by votes but by violence what do you expect? Once in a while you may get a benevolent dictator, but generally you have to wait for the Dictator's children or grandchildren's generation for things to start changing for the better.
I thought they chose a nice font for the documents.......DOH!!
Transitioning away from the two party system does not mean tearing down government as a whole.
1: eliminate the electoral college, make it a pure vote.
2: eliminate first past the post elections. Use some form of Instant Runoff or range voting option.
3: Change the US senate to be proportional representation. No more 2 seats per state, instead each party gets a number of votes equal to their percentage in a national election rounded down. This gives other parties a fair chance at establishing themselves and influencing larger parties through coalition.
4: change the house so that each states seats are proportional, allowing for local growth of alternative parties.
5: eliminate anonymous political contributions over $5000. If corporations expect to scream during an election, they should be as identifiable as anyone else cheer leading for their cause with a bullhorn.
I am sure there is more that could be done, but that is where I would start.
Any HONEST and HONORABLE institution should have nothing to hide. With all their working documents publicly available, this kind of thing would not happen. I have to conclude that Heartland does not meet this ideal.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
WHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
What they are asking is for those blogs etc. to censor themselves. Why not just ask them to append their statement to the posts, which will make their claims look more legitimate as well as making people not think they are hiding something devious.
When you have the law in your favor, bang on the law,
When you have the facts in your favor, bang on the facts,
When you have neither the law nor the facts in your favor, bang on the table.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Right wing followup:
When you have neither the law, nor the facts, nor the table in your favor, get a lawyer to hold a gun to someone's back and tell your opponent to shut up or you'll bankrupt them in legal fees defending yourself anyways.
This is the problem of the current state of US law. It doesn't MATTER if you have the law in your favor, or the facts in your favor, provided the other side has enough money to make you waste all of yours defending yourself in court against spurious motions and threats.
I wish the Pirate Party would gain a foothold in the USA. I don't like either sides of the same rotten coin that has power now.
* Carthago Delenda Est *
Why do you want the Senate to become the House of Reps. instead of representing the States interests?
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
Changing the Senate to a proportional system will never happen. It was the key point in the most important part of the compromises the states made in order to get the Constitution accepted. The smaller states will never go along with ratifying the amendment needed to make it happen.
It's why it was called the "Great Compromise".
It's always the cover-up that brings them down, Perhaps they should hire a new PR firm.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Hamlet (I, v, 166-167)
Two words.. Karl Rove.
This idea that only one side of the political spectrum takes part in dirty tricks is either a sign of some sort of mental disorder or in and of itself a dirty trick.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Not going to happen. If a political party can't get at least 35% of the vote in any particular election, it's not relevant in American politics. (And I might argue that number is higher.) Winner takes all, single representation means that there is no space for small parties to gain a foothold and grow: You either need to be a serious contender right off the bat, or you aren't going to be worth talking about.
'Sensible' is a curse word.
The states still have power based on on their population in the house. And I am not suggesting changing the senate to be like the house. I am suggesting the senate be changed to be more like a national parliament. Libertarians and Greens for instance may have 5% to 10% of the public interest, but they will almost never get in the senate under the current system. Under the system I suggest they would both win several seats.
It is my primary engine of change to break the stranglehold that the republican and democratic parties have on this country. I will grant that it is a major change, but major change may be necessary to reach that goal.
I see no reason for smaller states to wield a disproportionate amount of power at the federal level. Is there a more "acceptable", but no less effective, means of ensuring 3rd parties fill seats in the senate?
This guy watches too many movies. Unless they're just shooting off a pinky finger, any area you get shot by a "high-powered assault rifle" is a lethal area, barring immediate medical attention. Even a shot to the calf would have him bleed out long before he managed to crawl fifty yards.
It's pretty telling that he has given no thought whatsoever to the conscience of the shooter. He's going to order this young man to shoot, and likely kill, someone on live television, just to show how tough he is. He's willing to deal with the physical pain of being shot (likely because he doesn't understand the consequences), but the idea that forcing a person to murder another human being could cause emotional scarring is completely alien to him.
Thankfully, there is absolutely zero chance of this guy being elected to any office.
hmmm: big media or big religion.
I guess I'll take the least sucky of those: big media.
big religion scares me much more than big media ever will. big media worships the dollar and we can all understand that, to some degree. big religion thinks there are sky daddies in control and you just cannot reason with folks like that.
I will never accept republicans as viable until they tear down this old tyme religion they have recently clung to.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
So that, they dislike to follow the legal procedure of "DON'T ACCUSE THEM WITHOUTH PROOFS ON THE HAND".
JCPM: peoples shouldn't fear themselves about those accussers that provoked a generalized PANIC to the slashdot community!
I am still a supporter of the original design of the Senate - to give States equal representation in the Government.
Making both the House and the Senate proportion by population diminishes power of smaller states and gives too much to larger states.
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
I think I need to start another blog. Where do I find these documents so I can comment on them?
Think about this: how committed to individual liberty is a group that threatens civil and criminal penalties for discussing their donor list?
The Heartland Institute calls themselves a "libertarian think tank" which is rarely disputed. However, they are actually a pro-corporate think tank. This involves a lot of libertarian language and theory, but all of it is aimed at crippling government regulations over their donors. This works very well. It does not, however, advance the libertarian agenda or discussion in useful ways. They are shaping the discussion of liberty along frames they find useful, but have the effect of isolating and stupifying the libertarian movement. The result is bipartisan consensus on the Patriot Act. SOPA. TARP.
Pro-corporate think tanks and their government allies will never be able to have a conversation about state capture, the role of corporate institutions in individual liberty, or free individuals as a curb on corporate excess because a corporate-run tyranny is their preferred outcome. Libertarian-leaning people need to point this out, loudly and often, or they will continue to us for ends we do not support.
so when they get sued the lawyers will request the real copies from Heartland. So Heartland will commit suicide.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
They can't hire a new PR firm, because I don't think they have one to replace or add to. Any decent PR company would look at that piece on their website and cover it in red ink. It reads as if it has been written by an intern, and that may be unfair to some interns. "Their bad behaviour should be taken into account..." Obviously written by someone who has yet to meet a real, live journalist.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Within the house, my suggestion is that the number of seats appointed to each state remains the same. But within that allotment, the seats are granted proportionally. For instance Texas would still have 36 seats and might fill 15 of them with Republicans, 10 with Democrats, 5 with Libertarians and 6 with the Republic of Texas party.
I don't really have an issue with the smaller states having more or less power. But with only 2 seats per state in the senate, I don't see a way to break the duopoly party power in the senate without a major change.
I hasten to offend in every way I can the Heartland Institute. I hope they spend a vast fortune trying to sue me. I'm willing to do most anything to expose these creeps and could care less whether I win or lose a law suit with them. Fact is I am immune from bad consequences to a civil court. I intend to remain immune as well. In my state a person on Social Security, disabled who only owns one home and one vehicle can not be touched by a civil suit. So if these think tank types wish me to let up on them they better give me a small fortune so i would feel some sorrow if they win in court. I think these creeps rape babies. They might be the ones who murdered that Ramsey child. They might even have murdered Nicole Simpson. Worse yet I suspect they are Republicans.
I see no reason for smaller states to wield a disproportionate amount of power at the federal level. Is there a more "acceptable", but no less effective, means of ensuring 3rd parties fill seats in the senate?
They don't wield a "disproportionate" amount of power - on the contrary, they are less powerful than more populace states. You probably mean that the people of those states seem to wield a disproportionate amount of power in the senate (senators from small states represent less people than senators from populace state). But that is the only concession currently left to any of the small states. And they are states, not provinces or territories. The US is a conglomeration of sovereign states, left with most of their autonomy by the compact of the Constitution.
Without some influence as equal partners in the Federal compact, the small states would be marginalized by the larger ones. That would be a travesty, because the coastal states cannot represent the interests of the heartland states.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
Thank goodness the Feds got the printer and scanner makers to put those tiny yellow dots on printouts! Now we can use that information to find the serial number of the Epson scanner and find the hacker... oops... Heartland employee...oops...?... who created that document.
Or vice versa. In any case, whoever did the scannin' is the one who will get blamed for doin' the deed of releasin'...err stealin'... err ...?
Well anyway we know, something. But we're not quite sure what and we can't really talk about it \'cause Heartland seyz it's illegal maybe, and we'll all go to jail for 50 years, or somethin'. And doooon't yoooou forget it! Babaloooie!
Of course if it makes it to the Internet, it MUST be TRUE!
There is actually a pretty significant amount of evidence it's faked. ...
No, what you listed is merely evidence that the pdfs were not all produced at the same time.
This is interesting, but has no relevance to whether it's faked or not. There is no reason that real documents might not have been pdf'd at different times.
...The problem for Heartland is that they're acting like dicks toward a lot of people, when they should be upending heaven and hell to find the [putative] memo forger and crucifying him for libel.
Which brings up an interesting question. When somebody broke into the CRU and published (what turned out to be a highly edited selection of) stolen e-mail, the response of "let's upend heaven and hell to find the thieves" did not seem to be high on anybody's priority list. So, apparently, it's only an important crime if you steal documents from people denying the science?
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
There is only one party with two right wings.
thegodmovie.com - watch it
I might care more about the interests of the states if they didn't pass laws requiring women to undergo vaginal ultrasound in order to get an abortion, or usurp federal power with anti-immigration bills, or attempt to treat performing an abortion as a felony.
Nobody did expect riots in Hearthland [ Institute ]. Right? Or left?
See http://news.yahoo.com/influence-game-leaks-show-groups-climate-efforts-210616751.html.
When you have a violent revolution, the odds are the person or group willing AND capable of exerting the most violence will rise to the top. Once they rise to the top, they are unlikely to give up their power or hold democratic elections.
Like what happened in the American revolution, or maybe the French revolution, or any of the other democratic revolutions over the last couple of centuries?
That's obviously for the way for whoever intercepted these documents to play it. Post copies to foreign news outlets in countries like the UK, France, Australia and Japan with far healthier respect for the environment and then let the US news media pick up on the chatter via foreign websites and blogs. Nothing Heartland and its army of lawyers will be able to do about it, except perhaps if they want to transfer the entire Koch family fortune to their lawyers.
Why would they need to read them to compare them? Isn't that what text comparison methods are for? Maybe file comparison methods would work too.
Does Heartland think there are multiple versions of the same document floating around which is why they're hedging?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Good folksy, homey people from the heartland with good hearts who love their families and are good, wholesome and folksy and wear cowboy hats and say "god bless" all the time.
It can happen if the smaller parties start focusing on local, county, and state elections and ignore the federal scene until they are well represented at the local, county and state level. At that point, they will be too powerful to be ignored. The problem is that few want to do the hard work necessary to make it happen. They just want the other guy to do things their way.
Name something they have published in a journal which is "discredited".
The entire thesis of the Megan McArdle's two pieces rests on the assumption that the metadata associated with the pdf is several time zones away from the Heartland institute and hence, is a forgery. The problem with this line of reasoning is obvious, since any Heartland employee producing the memo could have been elsewhere when they created the PDF and then emailed it. The fact that the time posted on the metadata are not the same is hardly proof of anything in regard to the authenticity of the document's contents, although I can understand why someone might be willing to argue so if enough money exchanged hands.
You do realize that this begs the question, right? Since the denialists immediately trumpeted the Climategate emails as authentic, how could there have been a chance for any question of authenticity to arise? This is exactly what the Heartland Institute is criticizing now, that "the individuals who have commented so far on these documents did not wait for Heartland to confirm or deny the authenticity of the documents." The fact that the Climategate emails did indeed turn out to be authentic is irrelevant to this hypocritical argument.
Rob
The most troublesome aspect of the entire affair is that Koch Industries then gets a tax deduction for contributing to the non-profit Heartland Institute to do their PR for them.
...always ranting and raving for tort reform, but always the first wussies to threaten everyone with a lawsuit, when clearly they have broken the law.
That did cross my mind, the best I can think of is to go for an arm, and from what I've heard of modern assault rifles you'd probably lose the arm entirely?
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
And of course you can point us to your peer reviewed rebuttals of their work, which we all eagerly await.
No, by "free-market solutions" they are referring to Koch Industries bottom line.
The american revolution was NOT a violent revolution. The vast, vast majority of the violence was between military forces. Whereas the vast majoirty of the violence in the French revolution was against political enemies, with no regard to resistance. They fucking invented a machine designed for cutting off heads. That's fucked up right there.
And your post is pretty much the definition of a conspiracy theory.
Including partial truths is a very effective way to get a lie across. This is the Rush Limbaugh method. Although in this case it is likely 1 fake doc for every 10 real ones instead of the other way around.
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
Another plausible scenario is that that one document was leaked first, in the form of a paper copy (or scan of one), and it was the information of that document that inspired those who received it to seek further corroborative evidence via "social engineering."
(Personally, I refuse to vote for either party, but I know that it's a vain hope that my vote will make any difference.)
If enough people voted their conscience instead of for a team all of our votes would start to make a difference again.
We don't actually have to win an election in order to affect politics - all it takes is enough voters to scare the big-team parties into thinking they need to adopt some of the platforms of the parties of conscience. It is the marginal risk that can make the difference - e.g. if the democrats had wised up and adopted more of the Green party platform many of those people who voted for Ralph Nader would have voted for Gore instead. The democrats ignored the risk of losing a couple of percent of the voters and it lost them the election. The republican ass-kissing of the tea-party is an example of them having learned the Ralph Nader lesson.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Just Sayin'...
ad nazium...
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
-H. L. Mencken
As another poster points out, the American revolution was different from other revolutions for several reason. At least one of which was the fact that it ended up being a war between armies. In addition, it was a war of independence rather than a traditional revolution.
On the other hand, the French Revolution ended up exactly as the poster you replied to said. The French Revolution did not end in a democratic government for France. It ended in Napoleon's imperial rule of France.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
There's a personal email that states the sender caused his spouse to reach that moment of joy, because she said so.
If I were an dishonest organisation out to influence an manipulate then yes of course, all the saucy stuff would never be kept as PDFs only as hardcopy/eyes only.
So these arguments that it's a PDF from scans in my view make it not less real. Specific type of language is also meaningless because esp. in such documents which are 'inflammatory', people (the one/ones writing it) tend to write in their own style, not a 'house style'. Therefore the argument that this Megan McArdle gave is not an argument at all.
He's going to order this young man to shoot, and likely kill, someone on live television, just to show how tough he is.
If you don't think there are a lot of marines who would enjoy this, you haven't met very many marines.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
The crooked persuading the stupid that up is really down, Adam & Eve were real and climate change is a fairy tale!
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
The authenticity of the documents seems not to have deterred British Newspapers, who are all over this see for example:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2012/feb/15/leaked-heartland-institute-documents-climate-scepticism
Which has republished the original document in question:
http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/heartland_k-12_curriculum.jpg
A rather chilling read, when you consider the amount of money their sponsors are pouring into this effort.
The depth of the Climate Denier Conspiracy will continue to be big news as more and more of its internal operations are exposed and as the climate continues to grow warmer.
The US just got lucky with Geo. Washington.
That is their claim. However, it will now be a lot harder for them to fake whether or not Dr. David Wojick gets his $200,000 gift from the Anonymous Donor to Heartland Institute for his anti-science "modules" to be directed at elementary and high school students and their teachers. People are going to be watching.
Agreed, although the one's I've met (about six of them on Embassy duty in Kathmandu c.1995) wouldn't enjoy it any more than they would enjoy killing an opposing soldier. They'd just do what they were ordered to and get on with it.
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
There is something to that. However, if that was all it was, the U.S. would have descended into anarchy after Washington's death until a unifying, dictator sort emerged. If things had been only a little different, Andrew Jackson could have been such a figure. I still think the fact that each of the states was a semi-independent government and that each of those state governments joined in the revolt from Britain (rather than the revolt being an overthrow of the state governments as well as of the British government) played a significant role in the American Revolution turning out differently.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Have gnu, will travel.
Sort of how this billionaire supporter of Romney does it when papers or websites investigate him: http://www.salon.com/2012/02/19/billionaire_romney_donor_uses_threats_to_silence_critics/singleton/
I would rather the RIAA and MPIAA got completely lock down then industry be allow to run amok.
One means lock down on entertainment, the other means people die.
Plus., you're not really possible to lock down media, so the RIAA will loose anyways.
"(Personally, I refuse to vote for either party, but I know that it's a vain hope that my vote will make any difference.)"
Sadly, most third party is much, much worse and deluded.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Considering that actual conspiracies can and do happen - there is absolutely no reason to believe a conspiracy theory that is otherwise supported by the known facts is false.
The degree and veracity of said facts are the only measure for it's probability. If one of those facts is "a well-funded lobby group with a 40 year history of politically acting against science that could harm the profitability of the clients*" then a conspiracy theory has an even stronger balance of probability.
Now that doesn't prove it true. It doesn't prove it false. But it does mean that we should consider seriously the possibility that it may be true.
*Perfect summary of heartland: the same group was once the most vocal denialists of the link between smoking and cancer.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
True. He was offered the chance to become King of America, but because the US got so damn lucky with George Washington, he said no. That's how close the US came to becoming a dictatorship.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Their profit does not take precedence over our survival.
photosMy Photostream
You need to get on your hands and knees and fucking suck it, biotch. It's called being in the public eye and you have exactly ZERO legal recourse towards the people who exposing what scum you are using the memos because you're a PUBLIC entity in the PUBLIC eye and your ability to sue people for talking about what a bunch of fucking scum sucking mass homicide planning sub human degenerate predator animals you are is exactly ZERO.
Holy fuckin' shit it's fuckin' the first annual national DRAW fuckin' Heritage fuckin' Foundation day!!!!
I am short my crayons just now but picture Paul Weyrich with his dick up Edwin Feulner ass while he's being sucked off by Joseph Coors whose micro-phallic situation is on full display.
and Paul is saying to Edwin "say, let's wipe out half of human civilization and start this whole damn thing over with me an' you at the helm.."
and Edwin replies
Oh JESUS FUCK yeah , the ol' fuckin' Pol Pot Zero Day approach .. I fuckin' love it! Just start civilization over and make it go the RIGHT way this time HAW HAW HAW HAW...Kill the intellectuals and scientists first !!!! If it wears glasses and can read, it's a lefty! Kill em all! "
And then Joseph Coors pipes in "see my little dicklet? This is why I have to buy whores because no woman on the face of the earth would fuck me unless I paid her".
Fucking people talking about you online is going to be the LEAST of your problems. After the 114th US Congress passes the National SuperCrimes Bill of 2020 and the Torture Prohibition Repeal Act of 2020 designating any crime that effects millions of people a SuperCrime and permitting torture be used as a form of punishment, you'll be lucky if everyone who ever funded you and everyone in your organization from the President down to the fucking copyboy of your shithole lying cesspool "think tank" isn't last seen being reduced at the hands of the US Government to a reddened mass of flesh in some fucking DOD Dungeon crawling along the stone floor dragging 15 feet of your best intestines behind you and begging, pleading, squealing like a fucking pig not for mercy, but for the release death would bring.
Suck it bitch. Suck it.
I find it highly amusing that people are questioning the data based on minor irrelevant circumstantial data when the subject is an organization that makes sweeping generalizations denying proof based on minor irrelevant circumstantial data.
Today's (20 Feb) edition -- print and online -- of the Los Angeles Times contains an unsigned editorial (thus, the official opinion of the newspaper itself) condemning the Heartland Institute. The editorial notes that, even if the document whose authenticity is being disputed is a forgery, other Heartland documents that are authentic also discuss the planting of school curricula that deny the existence of global climate change caused by human activities.
See http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-ed-climate-20120220,0,3564279.story.
Heartland concludes their attributable post with "But honest disagreement should never be used to justify the criminal acts and fraud that occurred in the past 24 hours. As a matter of common decency and journalistic ethics, we ask everyone in the climate change debate to sit back and think about what just happened."
My question to them?
Where was that same call for reasoned response in 2009? (http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/)
Some days it's just not worth
chewing through my restraints.
The joke is...
You are actualy right for some of these.
Yes, GM donated to Heartland - who then whine about "Government Motors".
Watch this Heartland Institute video
Looks like the source of the release has identified himself:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-h-gleick/-the-origin-of-the-heartl_b_1289669.html
It would appear from this that there is a high likelyhood that all except one of the documents is genuine.
Of course, there's no indication (as yet) that the "Climate strategy" is not a part of the original documents, but given that one document was received from an anonomous source, and Heartland deny that this specific item originated from them, it'd be interesting to know where it originated from.
Looks like the rest of the documents are probably authentic, though.
Skeptic, but his perspective and analysis is spot-on:
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2012/02/heartland-documents-whose-biases-are-being-revealed-here.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/warrenmeyer/2012/02/21/peter-gleick-admits-to-stealing-heartland-documents/
Does this really reveal anything nefarious about anyone other than the clergy of the Church of Global Warming? It rightly *is* the goal of the skeptical community to combat the hysteria with both science and by exposing the lack of trustworthiness of those who would have us sink our hard earned money into this far from settled theory.
If anything, this has now backfired and truly exposed how the tide is turning in the AGW debate.
at least they're all doing a perfectly good job of making everyone insensitive, is that a dare perhaps ? maybe someone missed the memo on what's been waking up the past few years? Do those people look like they are sensitive to threats? I think not
Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
I better not comment then.
...crap
AccountKiller
Or someone may have changed the timezone in the OS they used to construct the PDF, inadvertently or deliberately, or they may not have changed the timezone in the OS since the default it came with which differed from that of HI.
Korma: Good
Important information has come forward.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/15/notes-on-the-fake-heartland-document/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/20/breaking-gleick-confesses/#more-57113
Here's the gist:
Gleick posed as someone on the board of the Hearland Institute and had someone send him internal documents. He then wrote his own document, bolstered by information gleamed from other true documents, threw it in the mix and claimed it as theirs. To hide his authorship, he scanned a print out into PDF and released the scanned document. Of course, the most objectionable content about targeting teachers and the like are all Gleick's words and not the Institutes.
He has now come forward and admitted his actions.
Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
(paraphrased) "These documents are not necessarily authentic. This particularly bad one is faked. [...] We apologize to all the donors who expected anonymity but were exposed by these faked, not-authentic documents."
0_o