11 thoughts on “Criminal Against Humanity, Part Two”

  1. Second off: It’s a violation of the Hatch Act if Hansen’s speech is overtly political and partisan — as it would be if the oil company executives had been democratically elected, like senators and congressmen and mayors, etc.

    This doesn’t seem to be the case, so Hansen is free to speak and express his opinions pretty much as he chooses, subject of course to libel and slander restrictions and professional standards for honesty and objectivity.

    This assumes Hansen is a “normal” civil servant, which might not be the case. He’s a fairly high-up-the-ladder guy, so he might be in a “supergrade” position. Supergrade CS positions are appointed ones, if I recall correctly, and are totally outside Hatch Act coverage. I.e., if this is the case, Hansen really can say what he wants whenever he chooses, but he would have absolutely no redress if say George Bush or Mike Griffin fired him.

    First off: the point of the Hatch Act was to get rid of a party-based civil service patronage system of appointments, so government employees could do their job without being obligated to one or another political party or party boss. Whatever Hansen is saying or doing, I think you have to be reading the Hatch Act with a very astigmatic lens to find a fit to the circumstances.

    -ms

  2. It’s interesting that when companies knowingly lie and spread disinformation to the public, for the company’s gain and the people’s loss, that is ok, but when someone calls them on that, he is a criminal against humanity.
    I guess truth never mattered much for Rand Simberg.

  3. mz, we can disagree about which side of the AGW debate is telling the truth. But when one side starts calling for its opponents to be punished simply for making their arguments, it becomes an issue of freedom. And freedom, besides being a good in itself, is vital if we’re ever to get at the truth — as any scientist knows. Hansen deserves scornful dismissal and Rand is delivering it.

  4. It’s a violation of the Hatch Act if Hansen’s speech is overtly political and partisan

    Really, from his Huffpo post:

    While international recognition of global warming was swift, actions have faltered. The U.S. refused to place limits on its emissions, and developing countries such as China and India rapidly increased their emissions.

    If politicians remain at loggerheads, citizens must lead. We must demand a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants. We must block fossil fuel interests who aim to squeeze every last drop of oil from public lands, off-shore, and wilderness areas. Those last drops are no solution. They provide continued exorbitant profits for a short-sighted self-serving industry, but no alleviation of our addiction or long-term energy solution.

    A price on emissions that cause harm is essential. Yes, a carbon tax. Carbon tax with 100 percent dividend is needed to wean us off fossil fuel addiction. Tax and dividend allows the marketplace, not politicians, to make investment decisions.

    Washington likes to spend our tax money line-by-line. Swarms of high-priced lobbyists in alligator shoes help Congress decide where to spend, and in turn the lobbyists’ clients provide “campaign” money.

    The next president must make a national low-loss electric grid an imperative. It will allow dispersed renewable energies to supplant fossil fuels for power generation. Technology exists for direct-current high-voltage buried transmission lines. Trunk lines can be completed in less than a decade and expanded analogous to interstate highways.

    Democracy works, but sometimes churns slowly. Time is short. The 2008 election is critical for the planet. If Americans turn out to pasture the most brontosaurian congressmen, if Washington adapts to address climate change, our children and grandchildren can still hold great expectations.

    That’s overtly partisan and political. Alas, since the comments were made at HuffPo without mention of his position within NASA, he’s likely within the requirements of the Hatch Act.

    What’s scary is this is a taxpaid bureaucrat actively calling for the imprisonment of civilians because they make claims contrary to the unelected office that he, James Hansen, holds. Can you imagine if Michael Chertoff came out and said we should put on trial for “high crimes” people saying there is no evidence that Office of Homeland Security works? That’s what James Hansen is suggesting when he wants to try Oil Executives who disagree with Hansen’s “climate model”.

    And let’s not forget that James Hansen’s lives in a glass house when it comes to “confusing the public”. His manifesto begins with: “Today I testified to Congress about global warming, 20 years after my June 23, 1988 testimony, which alerted the public that global warming was underway. “. However, it was GISS that 15 years previous was predicting a cooling of 3.5C. Perhaps Stephen Schneider and Ichtiague Rasool should be the first to be tried? Of course, their defense would probably focus on the fact they used Hansen’s model.

  5. It is obvious the truth doesn’t matter a damn bit to MZ, just what today’s flavor of Kool-Ade happens to be.

  6. ” mz wrote:

    It’s interesting that when companies knowingly lie and spread disinformation to the public, for the company’s gain and the people’s loss, that is ok,…..”

    Why is it assumed that oil companies are the only parties with a vested interest in this debate? You mean to tell me that the vast environmental lobby – the Sierra Club, Green Peace, the Environmental Defence Fund, and hundreds if not thousands of other organizations – does not consitute an interested party with vested interests? And big money is involved with them too – not just the trust-fund money they receive, but the prospective billions they hope to expropriate from private businesses and tax-payers.

  7. It’s interesting that when companies knowingly lie and spread disinformation to the public, for the company’s gain and the people’s loss, that is ok

    Damn right it is, for the same reason that it’s OK for you personally to lie and spread disinformation for your own benefit (or that of your favorite political cause), and to the people’s loss.

    Why should a man who runs an oil company be held to a higher standard of truthfulness and altruism than you? I don’t see it.

  10. Simberg is just a moron MZ. Glad you are beginning to grasp this. A total m*ther-effing moron who claims not to be a Republican and is swimming in the NRO gutter.

  11. You know, if you had taken antibotics sooner Another Drooling Projecting Moron, the syphallus would not have eaten your brain the way it obviously did.

Comments are closed.