Thursday, February 25, 2010

Lifestyles of the Religious Nutball: Pastor Steve Anderson’s Sermon “The Value of A Human Being”


Now people have “value” to Steve “I Want Obama To Die” Anderson

by Larry Simons
February 25, 2010

It seems now human beings have value to Pastor Steve Anderson of the Faithful Word Baptist Church in Tempe, Arizona. His February 14, 2010 sermon is titled, “The Value of a Human Being”. This, coming from the same piece of shit who wants Barack Obama to die and homosexuals to be wiped off the face of the Earth. He has also stated that killing Barack Obama or homosexuals would NOT be murder.

Here’s the sermon


Anderson says:

“One person has that kind of value in the eyes of Jesus Christ, and he ought to have that kind of value to us. Every human being is a real person made in the image of God, not just a statistic or a number or just another body in the building, no, they matter as an individual.”

Unless they’re Barack Obama, right Steve?


Unless they’re a homosexual, right Steve?


Steve Anderson.........hypocrite.........religious nutball.........fraud

Monday, February 22, 2010

FRAUD ALERT!! Anointed Leader Of Conservative Movement Glenn Beck Now Believes In Global Warming


Fox News talk show host’s stunning duplicity exposed yet again


Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
February 22, 2010

The stunning duplicity of Fox News host Glenn Beck has been exposed once again after the talk show host told USA Weekend magazine that he now believes in man-made global warming, after years of assuring his viewers that he was on the side of skeptics who questioned the science behind AGW claims.

In an article entitled Don’t judge Beck by his cover, Beck tells interviewer Dennis McCafferty, “You’d be an idiot not to notice the temperature change.”

“He also says there’s a legit case that global warming has, at least in part, been caused by mankind,” writes McCafferty, under the subheadline, “He believes in global warming.”

Beck’s sudden conversion to the increasingly debunked man-made global warming belief system is a shocking stab in the back of conservatives who consider Beck to be their anointed leader.

For years, Beck has railed against the insistence on behalf of global warming alarmists that “the debate is over” on man-made climate change, a claim that has been soundly trashed by the recent and ongoing Climategate scandal.

Even before Beck arrived at Fox News, when he still had his CNN show, he was attacking global warming as the greatest scam in history.

Beck devoted a whole chapter to deriding AGW in his Inconvenient Book, and has constantly attacked Al Gore as a promoter of alarmist claptrap about climate change while slamming the draconian measures being pushed as a “solution” to the problem.

Beck has provided a regular platform for prominent global warming skeptics such as Weather Channel founder John Coleman and Lord Christopher Monckton.

Once again, Beck has exposed himself as a chameleon who changes his political viewpoints on a whim depending on whose company he keeps. Beck is nothing more than an actor, fake crying on demand like a circus clown, posturing as some kind of grass roots conservative leader when he has abandoned every true conservative principle.

As we have constantly tried to warn conservatives fooled by his gimmicks, Glenn Beck is a slime ball turncoat, a neo-con who poses as a libertarian, a man who supported the bailout under Bush and then claimed he had opposed it all along when Obama got in office, the man who ceaselessly calls for more taxes on the American people while posing as a demagogue of the Tea Party movement which is supposed to stand against new taxes.

It’s unfortunate that Beck’s engaging screen presence is allied with duplicity, flip-flopping and back-stabbing, because millions of conservatives are still being led astray by someone who has deserted true conservatism on every level. The only remaining issue that Beck told the truth on was global warming – now it seems that too was a fraud intended to sucker viewers into the rat’s nest of neo-con rhetoric and big government advocacy that Beck represents.

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Alex Jones Interviews Lord Monckton: The Latest on the Global Warming Fraud


February 18, 2010

From The Alex Jones Show [February 17, 2010]





Mark Potok Says FEMA Camps, Evils of Secret Societies, the Threat of Martial Law and the New World Order Aren’t Real


Potok concludes the O’ Reilly segment by saying Constitutionalists are dangerous

by Larry Simons
February 18, 2010

On Wednesdays O’ Reilly Factor, Billo had on Mark Potok from the Southern Poverty Law Center [SPLC] to discuss his views on whether the Tea Party movement has been taken over by Patriot movement militia groups and white supremacists.

O’ Reilly did this segment in response to a N.Y. Times article that suggested the Tea Party movement is dangerous. Potok is a decent source to ask about this, since the SPLC tracks hate groups and has won court cases against white supremacists.

watch the clip


O’ Reilly tells Potok that the N.Y. Times article does not give an accurate description of the movement as a whole. One has to wonder if O’ Reilly is only defending the Tea Parties because he knows his fellow FOX News stooge [and fake libertarian] Glenn Beck is one of its major cheerleaders, and that recently GOP darling [and new FOX News employee] Sarah Palin has been giving keynote speeches at the Tea Parties.

Whatever O’ Reilly’s real motivation is for defending the Tea Party movement, I would have to agree with him at least in the sense that, across the board, the movement, in and of itself, is not a bad thing. Does it attract the occasional nutball who might take their guns and go on a rampage? Maybe so, but that does not invalidate the movement, or the second amendment of the Constitution.

O’ Reilly asks Potok if Potok thinks he is wrong for thinking the Tea Party movement is unrepresentative of any far-right group. Potok says:

“Well, I think you’re at least somewhat wrong. The way I would describe it is this: I don’t think that it’s fair to say that the Tea Party movement is, uh, a right-wing extremist movement and that’s all there is to it. I think that’s clearly not the case, but, what I would say, is we’ve got a lot of evidence to suggest…I mean, the movement is pretty well shot through with some of the elements, uh, that you find in the patriot groups, the militia groups…the anti-immigration groups and so on. So, the kind of thing we’re seeing is increasingly in the tea party movement, while I think their predominant worries are the size of the government, spending, the bailouts, the idea that undeserving elites like bank executives…are getting rewards out of this, you know, this is driving a lot of anger….still, we are seeing ideas like, you know, FEMA is running a set of secret concentration camps out there, martial law’s around the corner, the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations are sort of evil entities, involved in pushing us into, uh, a New World Order or some kind of global one-world government, and I think…some of the evidence is very well known”.

After O’ Reilly cuts in and says to Potok, “there is about 10%…of the tea party people who do fall under that paranoia blanket..” , Potok says this:

“(there’s) a lot of fear and frustration, and unfortunately, in a great many cases, these are things that are built around fears that aren’t real. We are spending a lot of money; there’s no question about it. But there are not secret concentration camps out there…”

Well, it was hard to look at Potok talking. Not only because he looks like the result of Seth Brundle throwing Jeff Lynne, William H. Macy, a Chia Pet and a hamster into his telepod and fusing them all together, but he was blatantly lying about the non-existence of detainment facilities and the threat of martial law.

Not only has there already been legislation introduced [H.R. 645] to “establish national emergency centers on military installations” but the Pentagon already has in place a Civilian Inmate Labor Program. The program is courtesy of Army Regulation 210-35, and it establishes labor programs and prison camps on Army installations.

If O’ Reilly really wanted to know something about detaining large numbers of American citizens, he could just walk over to fellow FOX News employee Oliver North’s office and simply ask him about it. North is the one who wrote Rex 84 [Readiness Exercise 84], which is a continuity of government plan that was designed for the detainment of American citizens incase of civil unrest or a national emergency [in other words: Martial Law]. North was both the NSC White House Aide and NSC liaison to FEMA.

Here’s Rex 84 being discussed during the Iran-Contra hearings in 1987. Congressman Jack Brooks brings up Rex 84 and North’s plan to suspend the Constitution in the event of a major disaster. He is stopped cold by the chairman who deems the questioning touches upon “a highly sensitive and classified area


North patterned the plan [of Rex 84] on a 1970 FEMA report written by [then] FEMA chief Louis Giuffrida which proposed the detention of up to 21 million American negroes in the event of a black militant uprising in the United States.

From 1967 to 1971, the FBI kept a list of over 100,000 people to be rounded up as subversive. This was known as the ‘ADEX’ list. The reason given for such installations usually ranges from “emergency centers” that are used for the “protection” of American citizens during a national emergency, to holding centers to detain illegal aliens.

The threat of martial law is most certainly real. As recent as two years ago, during the 2008 financial bailout, Congressman Mark Sherman told members of the House:

“...the only way they can pass this bill is by creating and sustaining a panic atmosphere. That atmosphere is not justified. Many of us were told in private conversations that if we voted against this bill on Monday, that the sky would fall, the market would drop two or three thousand points the first day, another couple thousand the second day. And a few members were even told that there would be martial law in America if we voted no. That's what I call fear fear-mongering, unjustified, proven wrong. We've got a week, we've got two weeks to write a good bill. The only way to write, to pass a bad bill: keep the panic pressure on”.

Here’s the clip


Wikipedia says that after conspiracy theorists picked up on this comment, Sherman’s office issued this clarification:

“I also want to stress that I have no reason to think that any of the leaders in Congress who were involved in negotiating with the Bush Administration regarding the bailout bill ever mentioned the possibility of martial law -- again, that was just an example of extreme and deliberately hyperbolic comments being passed around by members not directly involved in the negotiations.”

However, on the Alex Jones Show in October 2008, Sherman said although he didn’t take the threats seriously, he said he was convinced the people who said them were serious.

“I think these were people who really believed what they were saying. I don’t think these were people who, uh, were, you know, got called by Goldman Sachs and said ‘well, go say this or go say that’.



Executive Directive 51, signed by President Bush on May 4, 2007 essentially is a Martial Law continuance plan. How people like Potok can deny the possibility of Martial Law when legislation has already been passed and signed by Presidents is simply astonishing.

Here’s Alex Jones discussing FEMA camps, Martial Law, and false prophet/propagandist Glenn Beck in an extra of the film “Camp FEMA”.


How can the entire Tea Party movement consist of all of the same types of people with all of the same ideologies when many in the movement follow Glenn Beck, who denies there are FEMA camps and who attempts to discredit just about every “conspiracy theory” held by people in the Tea Party movement?

There are talks of one-world governments and a New World Order as well. Here are several clips proving that it is, at the very least, in the political vernacular.

Obama talking about “burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together


Scumbag Henry Kissinger calling for a New World Order


Gordon Brown says a New World Order is emerging


George Bush Sr. calling for a New World Order


Yet, according to Billo and Potok, we are “paranoid” by simply repeating what others say.

As far as the secret societies Trilateral Commission and Council on Foreign Relations are concerned, it’s simply a matter of reading what people like David Rockefeller [founder of the aforementioned entities] writes. Since no one but the elites are allowed in their secret meetings, that makes it a tad impossible to report what they discuss. One can only conclude that if something is done in secret, how good can it be? Could you imagine all of the NFL owners meeting secretly and not allowing sports reporters anywhere near the location of the meeting, and then not telling anyone anything that was dicussed? Western civilization as we know it would cease.

David Rockefeller wrote in his 2002 book titled “Memoirs”:

“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

Yeah, no evil or conspiracy there, Potok. The guy who founded the two institutions that Potok denied were secret or evil admits that they are secret and evil, but nahhhhhh, that’s not good enough. More evidence is required.

The segment concludes with O’ Reilly asking Potok if he can name one group out there right now who are dangerous, growing fast and that people should be aware of. I bet O’ Reilly was hoping and praying to God that Potok would say 9-11 truthers. Potok said that one group would be the Oath Keepers. Potok tells O’ Reilly that the Oath Keepers [who consist mainly of military and law enforcement personnel] wouldn’t blow up buildings, but their main interest is upholding the Constitution.

Potok commends obeying the Constitution, but then says that the dangerous thing about the group is their fear that Martial Law is coming and that Americans will be put in FEMA camps. Then Potok says:

“The Oath Keepers say specifically: We will not obey these orders. We refuse orders to put Americans in concentration camps. Now, is that dangerous? It seems to me the danger is, is that, these are men and women, in the case of police officers who are give a real power over the rest of us, sometimes the power of life and death, they make very important decisions. And if these men and women are animated by the idea that…foreign forces are about to come into this country and put us under Martial Law and throw us all into concentration camps, I think there is a certain danger associated with that. They operate on the basis of crazy theories, that may cause one of them to draw a gun one day.”

First of all, who ever said that it would be foreign forces that came in and instituted Martial Law? And even it IS foreign forces that came in and did those things, wouldn’t we have the right to defend ourselves according to the Constitution? Wouldn’t that be defense against tyranny?

According to Potok, obeying the Constitution and defending it is very dangerous. I have already posted the clips above that show the threat of Martial Law and FEMA camps are very real. That is the very reason why Oliver North panicked when Jack Brooks questioned him about his involvement in Rex 84 during the Iran-Contra hearings in 1987, because they are very REAL. That is also why Jack Brooks was cut off and his question was never answered.

Naturally, to Potok [and others like him], it’s a “crazy theory” to simply point out what is recorded on videotape and to report on signed legislation.

Simply amazing.

Monday, February 15, 2010

33 Conspiracy Theories That Turned Out To Be True, What Every Person Should Know...


by Jonathan Elinoff
New World Order Report

After reading the article released by Cracked.com, I decided to update and revise their work. The article gave me a chuckle because it lacked many famous and much larger conspiracy theories that became known. Their article had only listed seven. I can name 33 and I am about to release a revised list soon with 75. The article I read at cracked can be viewed here, but don't waste your time, all of that is in this article and more.

Most people can't resist getting the details on the latest conspiracy theories, no matter how far-fetched they may seem. At the same time, many people quickly denounce any conspiracy theory as untrue ... and sometimes as unpatriotic or just plain ridiculous. Lets not forget all of the thousands of conspiracies out of Wall Street like Bernie Madoff and many others to commit fraud and extortion, among many crimes of conspiracy. USA Today reports that over 75% of personal ads in the paper and on craigslist are married couples posing as single for a one night affair. When someone knocks on your door to sell you a set of knives or phone cards, anything for that matter, do they have a profit motive? What is conspiracy other than just a scary way of saying “alternative agenda”? When 2 friends go to a bar and begin to plan their wingman approach on 2 girls they see at the bar, how often are they planning on lying to those girls?“ I own a small business and am in town for a short while. Oh yeah, you look beautiful.”

Conspiracy theory is a term that originally was a neutral descriptor for any claim of civil, criminal or political conspiracy. However, it has come almost exclusively to refer to any fringe theory which explains a historical or current event as the result of a secret plot by conspirators of almost superhuman power and cunning. To conspire means "to join in a secret agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act or to use such means to accomplish a lawful end".The term "conspiracy theory" is frequently used by scholars and in popular culture to identify secret military, banking, or political actions aimed at stealing power, money, or freedom, from "the people".

To many, conspiracy theories are just human nature. Not all people in this world are honest, hard working and forthcoming about their intentions. Certainly, we can all agree on this. So how did the term “conspiracy theory” get grouped in with fiction, fantasy and folklore? Maybe that’s a conspiracy, just kidding. Or am I?

Skeptics are important in achieving an objective view of reality, however, skeptism is not the same as reinforcing the official storyline. In fact, a conspiracy theory can be argued as an alternative to the official or “mainstream” story of events. Therefore, when skeptics attempt to ridicule a conspiracy theory by using the official story as a means of proving the conspiracy wrong, in effect, they are just reinforcing the original “mainstream” view of history, and actually not being skeptical. This is not skeptism, it is just a convenient way for the establishment view of things to be seen as the correct version, all the time, every time. In fact, it is common for "hit pieces" or "debunking articles" to pick extremely fringe and not very populated conspiracy theories. This in turn makes all conspiracies on a subject matter look crazy. Skeptic magazine and Popular Mechanics, among many others, did this with 9/11. They referred to less than 10% of the many different conspiracy theories about 9/11 and picked the less popular ones. In fact, they picked the fringe, highly improbable points that only a few people make. This was used as the "final investigation" for looking into the conspiracy theories. Convenient, huh?

In fact, if one were to look into conspiracy theories, they will largely find that thinking about a conspiracy is associated with lunacy and paranoia. Some websites suggest it as an illness. It is also not surprising to see so many people on the internet writing about conspiracy theories in a condescending tone, usually with the words "kool-aid," "crack pot," or "nut job" in their articulation. This must be obvious to anyone that emotionally writing about such serious matter insults the reader more than the conspiracy theorist because there is no need to resort to this kind of behavior. It is employed often with an "expert" who will say something along the lines of, "for these conspiracies to be true, you would need hundreds if not thousands of people to be involved. It's just not conceivable."

I find it extremely odd that the assumption is on thousands of participants in a conspiracy. I, for one, find it hard to believe any conspiracy involving more than a handful of people but the fact remains that there have been conspiracies in our world, proven and not made up, that involved many hundreds of people. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact.

One more thing to consider, have you noticed that if the conspiracy is involving powerful interests with the ability to bribe, threaten or manipulate major institutions (like the mafia, big corporations or government) then don't you find it odd when people use one of those as the "credible" counter-argument? What I mean is, if you are discussing a conspiracy about the mafia, and someone hands you a debunking article that was written by the mafia, it doesn't seem like it would take rocket science to look at that with serious criticism and credibility. This is the case with many conspiracies. In fact, I am handed debunking pieces all the time written in many cases by the conspirators in question. Doesn't this seem odd to anybody else but me?

While intelligent cynicism certainly can be healthy, though, some of the greatest discoveries of all time were initially received (often with great vitriol) as blasphemous conspiracy theories -- think of the revelation that the earth was not the center of the universe, or that the world was not flat but actually round.

What follows are some of these most shocking modern conspiracy theories that turned out true after thorough investigation by our society. Some through congressional hearings, others through investigative journalism. Many of these, however, were just admitted to by those involved. These are just 33 of them, and I still had a long list of others to add. There are a total of 33 in this article. Many of these are listed with original and credible news clips on the matter, as well as documentaries.

Read about each conspiracy in length, here

1. The Dreyfus Affair
2. The Mafia
3. MK-ULTRA
4. Operation Mockingbird
5. Manhattan Project
6. Asbestos
7. Watergate
8. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study
9. Operation Northwoods
10. 1990 Testimony of Nayirah
11. Counter Intelligence Programs Against Activists in the 60s
12. The Iran-Contra Affair
13. The BCCI Scandal
14. CIA Drug Running in L.A.
15. Gulf of Tonkin Never Happened
16. The Business Plot
17. July 20, 1944 Conspiracy to Assassinate Hitler
18. Operation Ajax
19. Operation Snow White
20. Operation Gladio
21. The CIA Assassinates A Lot Of People (Church Committee)
22. The New World Order
23. Kennedy Assassination - the 2nd Investigation by Congress Few People Know About, United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA)
24. 1919 World Series Conspiracy
25. Karen Silkwood
26. CIA Drug Running in Arkansas
27. Bohemian Grove
28. Operation Paperclip
29. The Round Table
30. The Illuminati
31. The Trilateral Commission
32. Big Brother of the Shadow Government
33. The Federal Reserve Bank

Friday, February 12, 2010

Ahhhh (yawn)...Obama On the Verge of Yet Another Broken Promise


Remember when Obama continually and very sternly vowed that those making less than $250,000 a year would not see their taxes increase? That was BEFORE he had your vote, SUCKERS!

by Larry Simons
February 12, 2010

Ahhh yes, there’s nothing I love more than when, right before an election, people think, “Yeah, I know we’ve been duped before, but this time it’s different. This time, I really think things will change. He looks so sincere and speaks so eloquently, how can he be lying?” Easy. He doesn’t have your vote secured yet. That’s how.

Remember the good old days [2008] when Obama seemed immovable on the promise that he would lower taxes on those making less than $250,000? Well, it seems immovable Obama may just budge after all.

In a story by Rich Miller of Business Week, Obama is now ““agnostic” about raising taxes on households making less than $250,000 as part of a broad effort to rein in the budget deficit”. In an Oval Office interview for Business Week on February 9, Obama said that a presidential commission on the budget needs to consider all options for reducing the deficit. This includes putting “all ideas on the table” according to Obama.

Perfect timing for Obama. With his approval ratings teetering at the mid 40’s and millions of Americans finally waking up and realizing what a colossal mistake they made voting for yet another Bilderberg/Trilateral/CFR puppet, Obama is laying the groundwork for being a shoe-in for a one-term presidency and letting the floodgates wide open in 2012 for a Republican [or even Independent] predecessor.

Here are several clips showing Obama making it very very clear he will NOT raise taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year



Here’s a clip for the ages. In this clip [below, at 1:31 into it] Obama says this:

“If you make less than a quarter million dollars a year, let me sh---show of hands…how many people make less than a quarter million dollars a year? [nearly everyone raises their hands] All right. Well, I’m talking to you then. You will not see your taxes increase one single dime in an Obama administration.”

Well, not until now.



On FOX News’ Your World with Neil Cavuto on October 31, 2008, fill-in host Stewart Varney annihilated Obama spokesperson Malia Lazu when he kept pointing out that Obama, as well as several other Democrats [including Joe Biden and Bill Richardson], parroted different threshold figures of where Obama’s tax cut line would be drawn.

Obama changed the figure himself on more than one occasion. He said during one speech those who made under $250,000 would receive the tax cut. He said on another occasion it would be $200,000. Biden said the figure would be $150,000. Bill Richardson said the figure would be $120,000.

Here’s Obama spokesperson Malia Lazu defending the many different threshold figures


No one agreed on the figure. Maybe that is because it was a bullshit promise in which no one had any intention on delivering, so what was the importance of getting the figure right?

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Keith Olbermann Lies; Says Climate Change Means “Where It’s Supposed To Get Cold, It Gets Colder"


Olbermann would have us believe that global warming is ONLY happening in places where it’s supposed to be warm. Doesn’t this completely fly in the face of ‘melting’ ice caps?

by Larry Simons
February 10, 2010

During his “Worst Person in the World” segment on MSNBC’s Countdown, Keith Olbermann gave the runner-up trophy to Molly and Jimmy Rapert, the daughter and son-in-law of Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe, for building an igloo at 3rd Street and Independence Avenue SE in D.C. after the big snowstorm this past weekend. On top of the igloo was a sign that read: “Al Gore’s new home. Honk if you 'heart' global warming”.


The Rapert family mocking Al Gore

Olbermann then says:

“You do realize that it’s climate change. Where, when it’s supposed to get warm, it gets warm-er, and where it’s supposed to get cold, it gets cold-er. You got that, right? It’s not a freaking whether forecast from channel 4…”

Hmmm, Keith, that’s interesting that you say climate change is “..where it’s supposed to get cold, it gets cold-er”. The entire foundation of global warming stands on the premise that it is getting WARMER in the areas where it’s supposed to be COLD and where there is ice. In other words, the complete opposite of what you just said, Keith. It’s supposed to be COLD at the polar ice caps, but global warming advocates like Al Gore continually tell us that the ice caps are melting.

Olbermann is intentionally attempting to divert away from the fact that areas of the country [and the world] are getting bombarded with deadly snowstorms by claiming that climate change is a completely separate issue from global warming. How does he explain Al Gore’s repeated insistence that the polar ice caps are melting and polar bears are dying off [which is also a massive hoax] if warming is only happening in places where it is supposed to be warm?
It’s supposed to be warm at the arctic ice cap, Keith? If it was supposed to be warm there, then what is shocking about the fact that it’s supposedly melting?

The liberal website Think Progress says this about global warming in direct response to the Olbermann/Inhofe segment, “In reality, winter snows do not invalidate the reality that the planet just experienced the hottest decade on record. Scientists have been warning for decades that global warming would increase the severity of winter storms. This just might be the single most ridiculous statement I have ever seen regarding global warming.

Winter storms do not invalidate the warming of the planet? It should if Olbermann’s statement is true, that “where it’s supposed to get cold, it gets cold-er”. Global warming is supposed to increase the severity of winter storms? That’s like saying if I turned the dial in my freezer down to a lower [warmer] number, it should increase the severity of the freezing air. How utterly insane.

Think Progress adds, “This past January was the warmest January on record for the planet” and within that sentence they link to Climateprogress.org, a sister website of Think Progress which belongs to the organization Center for American Progress, founded by Democrat and former Clinton White House Chief of Staff John Podesta, who served with global warming fraud, Al Gore. Yeah, no conspiracy there. Move along, nothing to see here.

If Olbermann’s claim about climate change is true, that “where it’s supposed to be cold, it gets cold-er”, then the clips of Al Gore [below] talking about melting polar ice caps are in complete contradiction to what Olbermann says climate change is.

Besides, how would it be considered climate “change” if temperatures in a certain area were exactly what they are supposed to be? That’s not “change”. That would be climate expectancy, right?

In this clip, Gore says:

“It’s hard to capture the astonishment that the experts in science, in the…science of ice felt when they saw this minimum in 2005, which meant that uh, the amount of ice that had melted, it’s been roughly the size of the continental United States, minus an area roughly the size of Arizona…”


In this clip, Gore says:

“…that vast expanse of frozen ice [arctic ice cap] is now melting before our eyes”


watch Olbermann LIE in this clip

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


In the words of the great Lord Monckton, "The fact is: The game is up, the science is in, the truth is out, the scare is over."

Friday, February 5, 2010

A Glimpse of My Weekend Global Warming/Snowstorm Shut-In


I will be trapped this weekend thanks to abundance of global warming blanketing the entire mid-Atlantic region of the United States

by Larry Simons
February 5, 2010

Thanks to the 16-24 inches of global warming that is hitting the mid-Atlantic this weekend, I stocked up on my food and personal needs. Masses of others were at grocery stores too stocking up, preparing for the mass warming that will be hitting us the next two days.

As you can see in the picture [above] of outside my house, the global warming has begun. The warming is scheduled to continue until late afternoon on Saturday.


More warming [7:35 p.m.]


Global warming UPDATE [outside my house, 11:50 p.m.]


Global warming UPDATE #2 [4:10 a.m., Feb. 6]

Lord Christopher Monckton Destroys the Global Warming Scam in Australia


Lord Monckton speaking in Melbourne, Australia on February 1, 2010

February 5, 2010