Posted by: graemebird | February 13, 2009

We Want A Real Witch-Hunt.

Marnie lit up a cigarette and inhaled, appreciating the warmth as much as anything else. She wore a long second-hand grey coat over the summer clothes she had worn on the bus. She looked up at dark mid-morning sky, and it seemed to pain her to do so.  A man flashed a camera bulb at her. She was a sight it was true; A young woman in a coat meant for old men. A young woman unwilling to react to the splash of passing cars. 

“This aint February” thought Marnie.  “This aint February.” she said out loud.

But she knew that it was.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

What sort of weather is this? I don’t know about you guys. But my air conditioner is off and I don’t anticipate running it any time soon.  So the murderous environmentalists are blaiming GLOBAL WARMING for their own burnt flesh handiwork hey?So the environmentalists are “shifting their shadow the blame” hey? And is todays weather in Sydney and weather of late in Britain consistent with this sophisticated thesis? 

In their view its not them that murdered 300 Victorians. Its everything else BUT them.The arsonists. The arsonists. Blame the arsonists. Hunt down the arsonists and give them the death penalty. What bullshit.  Arsonists more generally cause fires and property damage. But in a modern civilised society they cause very little human deaths.  The arsonists may have caused the fires but THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS DID THE KILLING.

“The arsonists caused the fire. The environmentalists caused the deaths.” Thats your mantra. Take it. Take it and run with it wherever you can.  The left have their mantras, and these mantras seem to be effective, regardless of their manifest idiocy. Well lets have some mantras on our side. But the tactical inspiration from the left must only go so far and no further. After all, there is no doubt that THIS mantra, unlike those of the left, is a mantra that speaks the undeniable truth.

So the environmentalists are responsible for all the body count.  For all the deaths. Ok then (bloodynitpickers, stop sending those carping thought-objections my way)  For all the deaths except for some unknown and unknowable small number that might have happened anyway by sheer bad luck  of the individuals that may have been caught out. 

So the environmentalists did the killing. But a vicious witch-hunt will be out for the alleged arsonists who didn’t kill the humans but only started the fires. 

So the real killers can blame the ARSONISTS?  Who or what else can they blame? “GLOBAL WARMING” says David (killer) Karoly.   “GLOBAL WARMING” says (killer) Clive Hamilton.

WELL WHERE DO YOU FUCKING SEE IT!!!  I’m just too lazy to go and retrieve a heater but I may go have a hot bath and then put the really warm clothing on. The climate change crapola, as explanation for the severity of the fire via drought,  was always a lie. Since the really big fuel buildup doesn’t come from endless drought. But rather it comes from a wet winter and spring……. and only then if coupled with a hot dry period within the summer will we have the setup for the really big fire.

So its all lies. The environmentalists are blaming everyone but themselves with a real fury. I wouldn’t have brought it up. But they pre-emptively blamed me when they used the word “denialist”.  And that was too much.  They drew first blood “as it were” and so we have to react. The environmentalists blamed the  climate rationalists, denouncing them as “denialists” and that was too much too soon and the situation clearly requires a witchhunt. 

WE WANT A REAL WITCH-HUNT.      Somewhere, somehow, somebody has to pay. The arsonists ought to of course be hunted down and given their standard punishments. But lets not get too hysterical about it. The arsonists caused the fire, the property damage, they killed millions of innocent animals. But just as a matter of fucking fact, it was the environmentalists that caused all the human deaths (OH-bloody-KAY….. Alright…….  the environmentalists caused ALMOST ALL the human deaths.  Get with the principle of it all you nitpickers.)

WE WANT A REAL WITCH-HUNT. But the problem is we are seeking to prosecute and imprison a MOVEMENT and not a particular individual or any small coterie.

WE WANT A REAL WITCH-HUNT and yet we do not wish to treat unjustly those who are only partially culpable.

WE WANT A REAL WITCH-HUNT and yet we do not want to do damage to our legal rights and protections built up over centuries.

WE WANT A REAL WITCH HUNT but we are for justice and not in favour of the sort of piggish demonisation that leftists indulge in all the days of their lives.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

So what do we do? What form will the witch-hunt take? If we don’t want to damage the only partially culpable. If its a movement and not any one individual that did the murdering?

We can circle that square when we realise that natural law recognizes no persons right to their accustomed place on the public tit. And yet so many people have themselves an exalted place in society by virtue of their public sector jobs or their jobs in consultancies that live on government money.

WE WANT A REAL WITCH-HUNT.

And it must come out of massive sackings in the public sector alone. If we can fire 10 taxeaters for every one Victorian murdered then we will barely be paying our respects but still something is better than nothing. If we can fire 100 taxeaters for every Victorian murdered, then maybe we will be able to wipe most of the bad karma out for us being weak an uncaring in the face of Environmentalist abuse of others.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. Here is a typical environmentalist killer. Adrien. True filth. He’s already seen all the information on all the things that the environmentalists have done to get everyone killed and yet he comes up with this:

    SOMEONE SEZ:

    “Stalker – Get it straight, it has come to light that greennie policies are a contributing factor to both the start & spread of these fires.

    SO ADRIEN SEZ:

    “Would you please refer to some actual policies initiated by environmentalists contributing to this situation. The whole “make it look like a forest’ thing is more in line with the draconian aesthetics of Victorian planning committees.”:

    SO I SAY:
    You could point it all out again and in a months time he will be back to the same filthy tactics. Which proves there is no hope that any of these people will reform of their own accord. And they are entirely unwilling to change their policies and if anything will be gunning that much harder to get people killed again.

    CAN ANYONE FIND EVEN ONE REPENTANT ENVIRONMENTALIST?

  2. “We Want A Real Witch-Hunt.”

    Who is we?

    You and the homophobic, sexist and paranoid gun loving freak Winchester Quartermain?

    The last thing we, the Australian people, need, is a new Torquemada or McCarthy.

    WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM WITH MCCARTHY? HE HAD IMPECCABLE INFORMATION AND IN THE FIRST INSTANCE ALL HE WANTED WAS TO QUIETLY MOVE PEOPLE INTO PRIVATE PRACTICE AND AWAY FROM SENSITIVE AREAS IN GOVERNMENT. NO-ONE HAS A RIGHT TO A PUBLIC TIT JOB ANYHOW. HE NEVER ACCUSED ANYONE WHO WASN’T A COMMUNIST. AND HE TURNED OUT TO BE RIGHT IN ALL CASES.

    W
    Luckily no one takes you seriously 🙂

  3. “What sort of weather is this? I don’t know about you guys. But my air conditioner is off and I don’t anticipate running it any time soon. So the murderous environmentalists are blaiming GLOBAL WARMING for their own burnt flesh handiwork hey?So the environmentalists are “shifting their shadow the blame” hey? And is todays weather in Sydney and weather of late in Britain consistent with this sophisticated thesis? ”

    Climate is different to weather, genius.

    YOU MORON. THE CLIMATE IS GETTING COLDER. NOT ONLY THAT DAVID KAROLY AND CLIVE HAMILTON WERE BLAMING THE DEATHS ON “CLIMATE CHANGE” RATHER THAN ON ENVIRONMENTALISTS. WHICH WAS A TOTALLY IDIOTIC AND UNSCIENTIFIC CLAIM.

    “In their view its not them that murdered 300 Victorians. Its everything else BUT them.The arsonists. The arsonists. Blame the arsonists. Hunt down the arsonists and give them the death penalty. What bullshit. Arsonists more generally cause fires and property damage. But in a modern civilised society they cause very little human deaths. The arsonists may have caused the fires but THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS DID THE KILLING.”

    So you’re saying the arsonists who lit the fires didn’t kill people because it wasn’t their intention to?

    PRECISELY. ARSONISTS LIT THE FIRES. THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS KILLED THE PEOPLE. ARSONISTS ARE SMALL-TIME THRILLSEEKERS. ENVIRONMENTALISTS PLAN AHEAD WITH MALICE.

    Evidence please.

    WHAT ELSE COULD POSSIBLY MOTIVATE THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS? IF ARSONISTS WANTED TO MURDER PEOPLE THEY COULD HAVE DONE SO IN A TRADITIONALLY MORE EFFECTIVE WAY. SINCE YOU CAN LIGHT MANY FIRES AND NOT KILL ANYONE. BUT I’M NOT A LEFTIST SO I DON’T WISH TO PRETEND TO READ PEOPLES MINDS. ITS ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS HAVE FORM WHEN IT COMES TO HUMAN ERADICATION.

    Now can you also furnish us with your beloved evidence that the enviornmentalists deliberately wanted to kill people?

    WHAT ELSE WERE THEY TRYING TO DO? AND NOTICE THEY ARE UNREPENTANT AND DO NOT WISH TO CHANGE POLICY AND GIVE AUTONOMY BACK TO THE LANDOWNER. FURTHER THEY TEND TO BE BLATANT DDT-BUREACRATISATION HOLOCAUST DENIERS….. AND THE MOVEMENT ITSELF IS CONSISTENT IN ITS ANTI-HUMAN POLICIES.

    Some kind of written statement would be nice. Your personal belief does not count as evidence. You don’t support global warming because you (wrongly) claim there is no evidence, but you’re willing to support this nutty idea, despite the fact there actually IS no evidence, solely based on what you believe.

    Fucking. Genius.

    Even if you don’t believe that global warming is man-made, you can’t deny that it is warmer than it was twenty years ago. That is a fact.

    WE WANT TO BE MORE PRECISE THEN THAT. ITS NOT WARMER IN AUSTRALIA IN 1988 THEN 2008 AS FAR AS I KNOW. WHY THE LAST 20 YEARS IN PARTICULAR. THE GENERAL COOLING IS QUITE RECENT BUT IT CONTRADICTS ALARMIST MODELS UTTERLY.

    The average temperature is higher. Another fact.

    WHAT BEGINNING DATE AND ENDING DATE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? AND WHAT DO YOU IMAGINE IN YOUR LITTLE MIND THAT THIS PROVES.

    This means it is drier than it was twenty years ago.

    NO THAT DOESN’T FOLLOW AT ALL. CLEARLY YOU ARE AN IDIOT. WARMER MEANS WETTER. COLDER MEANS DROUGHT ON PLANET EARTH. THIS IS EVIDENT IN ALL PLANET HISTORY.

    Even Andrew Bolt concedes this. A dry climate has dry conditions in Victoria. This made the fires worse than they would have been twenty years ago. More indisputable facts.

    NO YOU ARE WRONG. A DRY CLIMATE LEADS TO NO FIRES AT ALL. RATHER A WET WINTER AND SPRING FOLLOWED BY A DRY SUMMER LEADS TO THE FUEL BUILDUP AND THEN THE DRYING OF THE FUEL. SO YOU ARE TALKING IDIOCY AND YOU HAVE PROVED YOU DON’T HAVE A CLUE WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

    Newflash – in the bush, fires happen. Nobody forced anyone to plant trees near their home.

    FIRES HAPPEN. SO WHY DID THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS TAKE AUTONOMY AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY OWNERS? WE ALWAYS HAVE FIRES BUT WE DIDN’T ALWAYS HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF DEATHS. SUMMER BRINGS THE FIRES BUT ONLY ENVIRONMENTALISTS BRING THE KILLING.

    People CHOSE to.

    NOW HERE COMES THE LEFTIST GIFT OF SECOND SITE. YOU ARE SAYING THAT THOUGH THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN FINED AND TREATED AS CRIMINALS NONE OF THESE PEOPLE WERE DISCOURAGED IN THE LEAST WHEN IT COMES TO CUTTING THEIR TREES DOWN. I WAS DISCOURAGED MERELY BY KNOWING I HAD TO GO TO THE COUNCIL AND WASN’T ALLOWED TO CUT DOWN TREES MYSELF. YOU TEND TO PUT THESE THINGS OFF. AND THEN YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT ENVIRONMENTALISTS ARE ALWAYS LYING ABOUT C02. THIS CAN BE DISCOURAGING TO MANY PEOPLE. IT CAN MAKE THEM FEEL GUILTY KILLING THEIR OWN TREES.

    Trees would suggest they’ve been there for a long time. Trees take years to grow. In any case, only one council had these laws in place.

    NOT THATS NOT TRUE AT ALL. THE DISCOURAGEMENT TO CUT DOWN TREES IS NOW BASICALLY UNIVERSAL. THATS WHY EVERYONE HAD TO DIE. YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE COUNCIL TO GET PERMISSION FOR THIS STUFF. TO GO TO THESE ASSHOLES AND GET DOWN ON ONE KNEE TO CONTROL YOUR OWN PROPERTY IS UNACCEPTABLE. ITS ALSO DISCOURAGING. WE FOUND WITH THE MALARIA HOLOCAUST THAT DISCOURAGEMENT WAS ENOUGH TO KILL. PUSHING UP THE PRICE BY GETTING SOME COUNTRIES TO STOP PRODUCTION. TYING THE CUTTING OUT OF DDT TO CONTINUING AID PROGRAMS. THIS SORT OF THING. THIS IS WHAT ENVIRONMENTALISTS HAVE COME TO SPECIALIZE IN. KILLING WITH PLAUSIBLE-DENIABILITY.

    YOU AS AN ENVIRONMENTALIST EVEN NOW AFTER ALL THESE MURDERS DO NOT WANT TO RETURN AUTONOMY TO THE PROPERTY OWNER. THATS ALL THE EVIDENCE THATS NEEDED HERE SINCE THERE IS NO OTHER EXPLANATION FOR THEIR BEHAVIOUR.

  4. Again. Can anyone find a single repentant environmentalist. On that wishes to give autonomy back to the property owner. One that would want to remove the need to gain permission from council to control his own property?

    That the environmentalists are unrepentant means they would have these people die all over again a second time. And it gives away their motives for ignoring the experts and discouraging the removal of trees.

  5. That’s the key here – I’d forgive the environmentalists and assume the best of their intentions IF, and only IF, they learned from this and came out unequivocably in favour of full property rights starting yesterday. That’s the bare minimum – they must support the right of property owners to decide how many trees will grow on their land – anything short of that is a license for mass murder.

    But do they support property rights? No, they don’t. They oppose council-funded burnoffs on one hand, which may be forgivable if they were for property rights on the other, which they aren’t.

    Their “solution” to bush-fires is totally pathetic – it’s basically that we must reduce GLOBAL CO2 emissions (as if Victorians, or even Australians, could ever do that) to stop bushfires, but otherwise we should take no measures to protect ourselves from the environment. That in itself is evidence of bad faith, because even environmentalists are politically astute enough to know that CO2 emissions will continue to rise rapidly so long as China and India refuse to sign onto Kyoto. Which is a given. So this leaves us with nothing to do but sit and wait for the next Massacre Season in January 2010.

    So calling Greenies mass murderers in light of these facts is completely justified. They are unequivocably for death and destruction.

  6. By the way, the following link puts paid to the damage-control rhetoric of guilty environmentalists such as “John Surname” – greenies were responsible for most of the deaths in the bushfires:

    http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25038717-5018722,00.html

    One of Australia’s leading bushfire experts, Rod Incoll, warned Nillumbik Shire Council in a 2003 report that it risked devastation if it went ahead with changes to planning laws proposed by green groups that restricted the removal of vegetation.

    The auditor-general’s audit found “fuel loads” of combustible material on the forest floors in the range of 20 to 60 tonnes a hectare in the Alexandra and Orbost regions and at Blackwood near Geelong – seven times higher than the department’s target.

    Mr Incoll said the CSIRO had put out excellent plain-English publications on building safety standards for bushfire-prone areas and that the Country Fire Authority was doing a good job of public education. After the Ash Wednesday fires, fire researcher Andrew Wilson had produced the CSIRO House Survival Meter, a simple calculator to determine the chances of a house surviving a bushfire.

    That, plus the CSIRO information, plus the CFA information, should have and would have been sufficient to prevent most of these unfortunate deaths. It falls down somewhere around the implementation,” Mr Incoll said.

    He said one of the commonsense rules was not having a tree within a tree height and a half from the house – about 50m.

    “People had vegetation growing up in their eves. Vegetation clearance wasn’t observed. People didn’t understand the threat or believe the threat.”

    Some areas had very strict controls about the removal of vegetation, “trees being the holy green icon”, he said. “Removal of trees is quite an effort in many municipalities and Nillumbik is one of them.”

  7. More grist for the mill – on the matter of John Surname’s dishonest attempt to imply that “only one local council” had bans on tree lopping, it is obviously worth mentioning that the MAJORITY of fire-deaths occured precisely within the jurisdiction of that council:

    Gentle complained of obstruction from green local government authorities of any type of fire mitigation strategies. He told of green interference at Kinglake – at the epicentre of Saturday’s disaster, where at least 147 people died – during a smaller fire there in 2007.

    http://www.smh.com.au/environment/green-ideas-must-take-blame-for-deaths-20090211-84mk.html

    Greens = Mass murder

  8. It’s as ridiculous as arguing that “only one” country elected the German National Socialist Workers Party in 1933.

  9. Well, well, well! It looks like the Shire of Murrindindi, which encompasses Marysville, another major death trap, also had restrictive tree-clearing policies:

    http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25052152-5013871,00.html

    “There are people in the community who don’t understand the problem and who place more value on trees than they do on people and houses,” Professor Thomas said.

    He said Murrindindi Council required residents to plant replacement trees for those taken down during construction of a house.

    “This is common among all the councils (in Victoria),” he said.

    He said his neighbour also successfully defended his house, but only because the replacement trees he had been ordered to plant nearby had not yet grown.

    Another nail in the Green coffin.

  10. Gosh, yet another Shire Council with restrictive tree-clearing policies. You’d think John Surname was lying or something:

    The Age reported this week that a family from Reedy Creek, in Mitchell Shire, had been fined $50,000 and spent a further $50,000 in legal costs because they bulldozed 250 trees to clear their property of fire danger.

    The shire allows clearing only within six metres of homes, but Liam Sheahan and his family cleared 100metres. Their house is one of the few in Reedy Creek to have survived last weekend’s bushfire, and the only one still standing in a two-kilometre area. Sheahan believes his illegal action has been vindicated.

    Greens = Hitler x Stalin

  11. Here is the link for the above quote:

    http://www.theage.com.au/national/her-beauty-and-her-terror-20090214-87a2.html

  12. Well thats right. We see pretty much a one-to-one relation between death and environmentalist influence. Just as we would expect.

    Also if you look at matters on a city-wide basis. You really wouldn’t expect fires to invade far into a modern city. But if you look at Canberra, it wasn’t that many years back and the embarrassing situation of a fire invading right into the city is in evidence. Well its probably a fair guess that environmentalist influence is fairly strong in Canberra.

    How about in the US? Where is the most powerful environmentalist influence? Would California be a pretty good guess? Well in any case we see fires embarrassingly invading right into modern cities.

    In any case nothing I’ve said in this post is real evidence. But Michael Fisk has come up with good evidence.

    Just a bit earlier channel 7 had a show on and there was a town meeting of survivors. And the survivors were in no doubt where the blame lied although at this point they will be blaming themselves as well. But the wildnerness society fellow was totally unrepentant. There he is in a room full of traumatised people and still he is totally unrepentant,rude and insensitive. Nothing to do with the discouragement to cut down trees in his view. Nothing to do with the PROHIBITION in cutting down trees.

    One bloke in the room reckons he cut down 3oo+ trees on his own property. 327 it might have been. 327 out of an estimated 30 000-40 000. Wouldn’t have affected biodiversity even a tiny bit. But the environmentalist councils hounded him, pursued the matter and fined him $30 000 dollars.

    We are a modern country. We have the technology to put small fires out, to evacuate people, to deliver medical attention, and all those things that come with reducing deaths.

    But if we tolerate this human eradication philosophy in our midsts they will simply continue and expand on their murderous rampage.

  13. I fear your prescriptions are far too soft Mr Bird but understandable in light of political considerations. These killers are in league with the Rockefellers and Rothschilds and Soroses and one whiff of potential rebellion and they would have us all in concetration camps the next morning, mark my words. Hence we must for the moment at least make no hint that we may need to break the law in future to avert greater catastrophe.

  14. “The shire allows clearing only within six metres of homes, but Liam Sheahan and his family cleared 100metres. Their house is one of the few in Reedy Creek to have survived last weekend’s bushfire, and the only one still standing in a two-kilometre area. Sheahan believes his illegal action has been vindicated.”

    The Shire only allows clearing within 6 metres of the house.

    Six metres.

    Why?

    You will not expect repentant environmentalists to want to change these regulations any time soon. But in any case having to so much as go to the council and fill out forms is an unacceptable humiliation and discouragement. And it allows environmentalists the opportunity to throw other hurdles in front of people. Like long waiting times, and having to pay for some jerk to come out and look at the place, and just generally other examples of jerking people around.

  15. It’s hilarious to see the Greenies switch to full holocaust denial mode.

    The fact is this – we have seen the closest thing to a social/scientific experiment take place in the Shire of Mitchell.

    The Greenie regulations said that you couldn’t clear more than six metres of vegetation from your house. One man broke that regulation and ultimately paid $100,000 in fines and legal costs to clear 100 metres of vegetation.

    His house is now the only house standing within 2 kilometres and one of the few in his general locality to survive. It’s an open-and-shut case – Greenies Kill.

  16. Well everything you say is true Winchester. But mass-sackings must be tried. We don’t want to reach for the Pinochet holster until every other possibility that shows promise has been tried.

    It is not to be underestimated how a potential assault on their parasitical public service jobs can influence these peoples behaviour though Winchester.

    Thats the one thing they care more about than their ludicrous global aspirations.

    Imagine some parasite with a Masters degree in some useless bureaucracy having to come down to the factory and try his best in an entry-level job? Imagine him having to cope with the fall in his status, and in the crazily exalted position that these clowns have placed there ego in as presuming to be the Masters of us all? Masters of the people who support these parasites and raise their children?

    Even the clear and present danger of mass-sackings would put the fear into these guys. Because some part of their subconscious will know just how existentially useless these people are.

  17. Michael have you tracked these holocaust-deniers to this site?

    http://www.grods.com/post/5303/comment-page-6/

    One good thing is that they’ve given me a bit of a run. So we could be dealing with a higher class of holocaust-denier here.

  18. Winchester Quartermain Says:

    “Hence we must for the moment at least make no hint that we may need to break the law in future to avert greater catastrophe.”

    Thanks for he hint about your intentions,but anybody who browsed through your blog already knew about your authoritarian desires.

    Luckily it’s all only in the junkyard you call your brain 🙂

  19. Hi John Surname. Just regarding these following arguments of yours:

    Newflash – in the bush, fires happen. Nobody forced anyone to plant trees near their home.

    In any case, only one council had these laws in place.

    Seeing as I’ve pretty comprehensively refuted both of these key points of yours, I’d like to invite you back to retract these statements.

    Thanks.

  20. Yeah lets have that retraction John.

  21. I really must commend you Michael for taking the argument out there hard. Sometimes these things, well it feels like I’ve got to argue these matters on my own.

    Good show.

    Notice that you’ve given a bit of psychic cover to the Catallaxians and some of them are able to talk in a commonsense way about the issue this time around.

  22. Hi Graeme, I’d like you to kiss my arse. I’m not retracting anything. Miranda Devine’s article is wrong.

    YOU HAVE BEEN PROVED WRONG. WHERE IS THAT RETRACTION

    300 deaths? She’s wrong. It’s 181.

    WE DON’T KNOW THE FINAL COUNT OF PEOPLE THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS KILLED. BUT 181 WILL DO FOR NOW.

    http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?Document_ID=19280

    I don’t get news from opinion columnists. I get it from the source.

    A GOOD PRACTICE. SO WHY DO YOU GET THINGS TOTALLY WRONG ALMOST ALL THE TIME?

    Would it surprise you to hear that the Kinglake fire was started by a felled powerline because a privately owned company didn’t maintain it properly? And it sparked in a pine plantation?

    NOT AT ALL. THERE IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE AN IGNITION SOURCE. BUT ONLY THE MURDEROUS ENVIRONMENTALISTS COULD HAVE PREVENTED FUEL-CLEARING NEAR ROADS AND HOUSES.

    Combined with the heat and wind (which neither of you experienced, and I did) it is no wonder why people so many people died in that horrific fire.

    WE KNOW WHY THEY DIED. THE ENVIRONMENTALIST MOVEMENT PREVENTED AND DISCOURAGED THE REMOVAL OF TREES.

    And to blame it on a faceless group of people, while refusing to give any names, is utterly callous.

    WHAT HAS NAMES GOT TO DO WITH IT? WE CAN FIND THE NAMES. BUT THIS IS THE ENVIRONMENTALIST MOVEMENTS DOING. THERE IS NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT. THERE OUGHT BE NO CONTROVERSY ON THAT POINT AT LEAST. WE CAN ASK THE SURVIVING VICTIMS FOR SOME OF THE NAMES OF THEIR OPPRESSORS. THERE ARE PLENTY OF AVENUES TO FIND LISTS OF CULPABLE PEOPLE THAT NEED TO BE REMOVED TO PRIVATE WORK.

    I’m right, you’re wrong. No Greens, greenies, or environmentalists are going to be charged out of this because they have nothing to answer for.

    BUT THATS JUSTS SOOTHSAYING. WHETHER THEY ARE CHARGED OR NOT IT IS THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS WHO DID THE KILLING. THEM BEING CHARGED HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. NO-ONE HAS BEEN CHARGED FOR THE TENS OF MILLIONS THAT DIED OF MALARIA EITHER. OR FOR THE 200 000 000 PLUS WHO NOW CARRY THE DISEASE THANKS TO THE EFFORTS OF THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS. NOT MANY PEOPLE ARE IN JAIL FOR SUPPORTING THE MURDEROUS TWENTIETH CENTURY CAMPAIGN OF MASS MURDER BY THE COMMUNISTS EITHER. WHAT WAS YOUR POINT. YOU ARE NOT TOO SMART ARE YOU. NO YOU ARE NOT.

    As I stated at Grods:

    “This is such a difficult choice. Either the nameless environmentalist movement (in conjunction with majority of scientists who are commiting scientific fraud) have infiltrated the Greens, and local councils, and forced them to enact secret eugenics policies to murder country Victorians, or Graeme is wrong.”

    THERE IS NOTHING SECRETIVE ABOUT IT. THERE IS SUCH A THING AS THE ENVIRONMENTALIST MOVEMENT WRIT LARGE. AND WE KNOW ABOUT THAT SIX METRE RULE. AND THE RESTRICTIONS TO REMOVING TREES AND THE NEED TO GET COUNCIL APPROVAL.

    You have been unable to come up with any evidence.

    YOU ARE LYING. AND FISK HAS COME UP WITH A GREAT DEAL OF EVIDENCE. AND THE EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FOR ALL TO SEE IN THE PAPERS. A STRAIGHT LIE ON YOUR PART.

    For someone who is frothing at the mouth demanding evidence at any thread you visit, your own refusal to name names, quote Greens charter that clearly state Eugenics policies is quite hilarious.

    THIS IS A LEFTIST OBSESSION WITH NAMING NAMES. BUT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A FULL BLOWN INTERNATIONAL MOVEMENT HERE. WE CAN NAME NAMES. BUT ITS NOT IMPORTANT. You are the epitome of hypocrisy.

    NOTHING IS MORE MORONIC THEN THIS LEFTIST DEMAND TO NAME NAMES.

  23. “YOU MORON. THE CLIMATE IS GETTING COLDER. NOT ONLY THAT DAVID KAROLY AND CLIVE HAMILTON WERE BLAMING THE DEATHS ON “CLIMATE CHANGE” RATHER THAN ON ENVIRONMENTALISTS. WHICH WAS A TOTALLY IDIOTIC AND UNSCIENTIFIC CLAIM.”

    Prove it’s getting colder.

    ITS A FACT THAT THE IMBEDDED ENERGY IN THE OCEANS PEAKED SOMETIME IN 2003. WE HAVEN’T HAD A WARMER YEAR THEN 1998. AND THE TRENDLINE TURNED DOWN AFTER 2005. YOU PROVE THAT WE ARE STILL WARMING. YOU CANNOT DO IT.

    “PRECISELY. ARSONISTS LIT THE FIRES. THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS KILLED THE PEOPLE. ARSONISTS ARE SMALL-TIME THRILLSEEKERS. ENVIRONMENTALISTS PLAN AHEAD WITH MALICE.”

    Prove it. Prove that the arsonists didn’t intend to kill anybody

    NOW YOU PROVE THAT THEY DID INTEND TO KILL HUMANS. ITS NOT REASONABLE TO ASSUME SO. AS YOU POINT OUT ONE OF THE FIRES WAS BEGUN BY POWERLINES. THERE IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE AN IGNITION SOURCE. ONLY ENVIRONMENTALISTS CAUSE DEATH (OK ….. “IN LARGE NUMBERS…)

    and the nameless, faceless environmentalists did. I expect quotes and hard evidence, not conjecture and personal opinion.

    BUT YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO GIVE ANYTHING IN RETURN APART FROM ENDLESS HOLOCAUST DENIAL.

    If you ever run over someone in a car, I hope you try to beat prison by claiming you didn’t mean to kill them.

    WHAT A STUPID COMMENT? HOW IS THAT RELEVANT.

    “WHAT ELSE COULD POSSIBLY MOTIVATE THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS? IF ARSONISTS WANTED TO MURDER PEOPLE THEY COULD HAVE DONE SO IN A TRADITIONALLY MORE EFFECTIVE WAY. SINCE YOU CAN LIGHT MANY FIRES AND NOT KILL ANYONE. BUT I’M NOT A LEFTIST SO I DON’T WISH TO PRETEND TO READ PEOPLES MINDS. ITS ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS HAVE FORM WHEN IT COMES TO HUMAN ERADICATION. ”

    Personal belief isn’t evidence. It’s made-up conjecture. I don’t pretend to read minds, I just like to gather evidence and then make an opinion. You work the other way round. Still waitin’ on the ol’ evidence you’re refusing to provide because it doesn’t exist.

    WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY? ONE OUGHT ONLY BE THOUGHT TO BE MOTIVATED BY THE REASONABLE EXPECTATIONS OF THE OUTCOME OF ONES ACTIONS. wHEREAS THE ARSONIST COULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED TO START A FIRE IT BEGGARS BELIEF TO THINK THAT THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS ACTIONS WOULD NOT LEAD TO MASS KILLING. WHICH IT DID. JUST AS WOULD BE EXPECTED.

    “WHAT ELSE WERE THEY TRYING TO DO? AND NOTICE THEY ARE UNREPENTANT AND DO NOT WISH TO CHANGE POLICY AND GIVE AUTONOMY BACK TO THE LANDOWNER. FURTHER THEY TEND TO BE BLATANT DDT-BUREACRATISATION HOLOCAUST DENIERS….. AND THE MOVEMENT ITSELF IS CONSISTENT IN ITS ANTI-HUMAN POLICIES.”

    Who’s they? THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS AND HOLOCAUST-DENIERS LIKE YOU. ENVIRONMENTALISTS AND PEOPLE WHO DENY THE MALARIA HOLOCAUST TEND TO BE THE SAME PEOPLE.

    Just who are these environmentalists who secretly control council policy?

    THERE IS NO SECRET ABOUT IT. OBVIOUSLY SOMEONE BROUGHT IN THE SIX METRE RULE. SOMEONE BROUGHT IN RULES TO PROSECUTE PEOPLE FOR CLEARING THEIR OWN LAND.

    “WE WANT TO BE MORE PRECISE THEN THAT. ITS NOT WARMER IN AUSTRALIA IN 1988 THEN 2008 AS FAR AS I KNOW. WHY THE LAST 20 YEARS IN PARTICULAR. THE GENERAL COOLING IS QUITE RECENT BUT IT CONTRADICTS ALARMIST MODELS UTTERLY.”

    It is. Look up this little graph, and follow the line upwards from 1989: http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/fawcett_no_enso.gif

    THOSE 3 GRAPHS ARE FRAUDULENT SINCE THEY ARE ENSO-ADJUSTED. ALSO THEY DON’T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT AUSTRALIA. SO MY COMMENTS STAND. WHY BOTHER PUTTING UP A GRAPH THAT DOESN’T CONTRADICT WHAT I’VE JUST TOLD YOU AND THAT ARE ARBITRARILY MANIPULATED?

    Actually, there is no cooling. Because El Nino corrupted the chart in 1998,

    ENSO IS PART OF WARMING AND COOLING DUMMY. ENSO DIDN’T CORRUPT THE CHART. THE IDIOTS THAT MANIPULATED THE CHART TO TAKE ITS EFFECTS OUT CORRUPTED THE CHART.

    to the untrained eye it looks like it’s gone down. But if you remove the immeadiately affected El Nino areas re-calculate the averages you see that the temp in fact keeps going up.

    THE TEMPERATURE HAS GONE DOWN. THATS JUST A FACT. AS IN FACT YOU ADMIT. TO STOP IT FROM GOING DOWN THEY’VE RIGGED THE CHARTS AND REMOVED ENSO.

    That spike would have happened warming or no warming. But once removed the warming trends continue.

    THE WARMING TREND DOES NOT CONTINUE. WHAT HAPPENED IS THEY RIGGED THE CHART BY ARBITRARILY REMOVING ENSO.

    “NO THAT DOESN’T FOLLOW AT ALL. CLEARLY YOU ARE AN IDIOT. WARMER MEANS WETTER. COLDER MEANS DROUGHT ON PLANET EARTH. THIS IS EVIDENT IN ALL PLANET HISTORY.”

    Should be easy for you to PROVE then.

    “FIRES HAPPEN. SO WHY DID THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS TAKE AUTONOMY AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY OWNERS? WE ALWAYS HAVE FIRES BUT WE DIDN’T ALWAYS HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF DEATHS. SUMMER BRINGS THE FIRES BUT ONLY ENVIRONMENTALISTS BRING THE KILLING.”

    We also didn’t have large populations in the country and “tree changes”. Your arguments assume that because people COULD clear trees they WOULD. But they didn’t before, so why would they now? Hell, why don’t they just concrete their property and stay realy safe? People move out that way to live amongst the trees. Not to remove all the trees.

    “NOW HERE COMES THE LEFTIST GIFT OF SECOND SITE. YOU ARE SAYING THAT THOUGH THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN FINED AND TREATED AS CRIMINALS NONE OF THESE PEOPLE WERE DISCOURAGED IN THE LEAST WHEN IT COMES TO CUTTING THEIR TREES DOWN. I WAS DISCOURAGED MERELY BY KNOWING I HAD TO GO TO THE COUNCIL AND WASN’T ALLOWED TO CUT DOWN TREES MYSELF. YOU TEND TO PUT THESE THINGS OFF. AND THEN YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT ENVIRONMENTALISTS ARE ALWAYS LYING ABOUT C02. THIS CAN BE DISCOURAGING TO MANY PEOPLE. IT CAN MAKE THEM FEEL GUILTY KILLING THEIR OWN TREES.”

    Yes, that’s it, people feel guilty about killing trees. People are sheep who can’t think for theselves. Sheesh.

    “NOT THATS NOT TRUE AT ALL. THE DISCOURAGEMENT TO CUT DOWN TREES IS NOW BASICALLY UNIVERSAL. THATS WHY EVERYONE HAD TO DIE. YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE COUNCIL TO GET PERMISSION FOR THIS STUFF. ”

    So get permission.

    “TO GO TO THESE ASSHOLES AND GET DOWN ON ONE KNEE TO CONTROL YOUR OWN PROPERTY IS UNACCEPTABLE. ”

    So vote for different councillors to overturn the laws.

    “ITS ALSO DISCOURAGING. WE FOUND WITH THE MALARIA HOLOCAUST THAT DISCOURAGEMENT WAS ENOUGH TO KILL. PUSHING UP THE PRICE BY GETTING SOME COUNTRIES TO STOP PRODUCTION. TYING THE CUTTING OUT OF DDT TO CONTINUING AID PROGRAMS. THIS SORT OF THING. THIS IS WHAT ENVIRONMENTALISTS HAVE COME TO SPECIALIZE IN. KILLING WITH PLAUSIBLE-DENIABILITY. ”

    That’s all nonesense, you reactionary idiot. It’s conjecture and made up.

    “YOU AS AN ENVIRONMENTALIST EVEN NOW AFTER ALL THESE MURDERS DO NOT WANT TO RETURN AUTONOMY TO THE PROPERTY OWNER. THATS ALL THE EVIDENCE THATS NEEDED HERE SINCE THERE IS NO OTHER EXPLANATION FOR THEIR BEHAVIOUR.”

    Stop lying and face facts. Removing trees (which had been there for years) was never going to a) happen

    THATS A RIDICULOUS LIE

    or b) save anyone, especially those who chose to stay and fight.

    THATS ALSO A RIDICULOUS LIES. IF THE TREES ARE CLEARED THE PEOPLE IN THE HOUSE WILL LIVE. EVEN IF AT SOME STAGE THEY HAVE TO FLEE THE HOUSE.

    I THINK WE HAVE A FULL-SPECTRUM HOLOCAUST-DENIER HERE. WE SEE THAT ENVIRONMENTALISTS LIKE JOHN SURNAME ARE TOTALLY UNREPENTANT. THEIR MOVEMENT HAS KILLED. AND THEY APPROVE OF THE KILLING. THEY DENY IT AND APPROVE OF IT AT THE SAME TIME. THIS IS THE WAY WITH HOLOCAUST DENIERS.

  24. Stop lying and face facts. Removing trees (which had been there for years) was never going to a) happen, or b) save anyone, especially those who chose to stay and fight. You, as usual, are looking for an angle to beat your perceived enemies with.

    This is palpably false. The Sheahan family, in the Shire of Mitchell, violated the council’s draconian Greenie-initiated anti-clearing rules (which prohibited any landowner from clearing further than 6m from their house). Their house is the now only one in a 2km radius left standing.

  25. Stop lying and face facts. Removing trees (which had been there for years) was never going to a) happen, or b) save anyone, especially those who chose to stay and fight. You, as usual, are looking for an angle to beat your perceived enemies with.

    This is palpably false. The Sheahan family, in the Shire of Mitchell, violated the council’s draconian Greenie-initiated anti-clearing rules (which prohibited any landowner from clearing further than 6m from their house). Their house is the now the only one in a 2km radius left standing.

  26. So get permission.

    Um, it was impossible to GET permission from councils to clear anything approaching an adequate amount of bushland to protect your house (and your life). That’s the whole point.

    But if you don’t believe me, then you are welcome to meet the Spooner family of Arthurs Creek, face to face, and explain to them why it is apparently such a simple procedure to get permission from the Nillumbik shire council to clear 50 metres of bushland (which would have been enough, combined with other measures, to protect your house, according to experts). I’m sure they will be most receptive to your point of view, having lost a trifling two family members to the apparently “non-existent” clearing restrictions, of which you are an objective apologist.

  27. Your arguments assume that because people COULD clear trees they WOULD. But they didn’t before, so why would they now?

    One resident in the Shire of Mitchell was sufficiently moved to pay a $50,000 fine plus another $50,000 in legal costs in order to save his property and his life. There are not many people who are prepared to run the gauntlett of government prosecutions in order to save their life, but this is a pretty telling example. Did I mention that his house is now the only one standing in the area?

  28. I just like to gather evidence and then make an opinion.

    Ahem. You have already proffered two opinions on this website – the first that only one shire council had restrictive clearing laws, and the second that nobody forced property owners to plant trees near their house.

    Both of these opinions are palpably false, by any reasonable standard of evidence, and you have thus far refused to retract them. Why would anybody bother to listen to anything you have to say henceforth, if you simply refuse to subject any of your opinions to the test of falsification?

    • You’ve been caught lying John. So lets have that retraction. You’ve been caught lying in a tremendously callous fashion. So we better get that retraction holocaust-denier.

  29. “so get permission” Its not the councils property. And it is not acceptable for the council to be requiring people to get permission for the clearing of their own trees. Plus even so much as having to get permission and fill in forms is a DISCOURAGEMENT. It means that less fuel will be cleared. Less fuel will be cleared and this will help cause procrastination on this matter. Hence its one more harassment put upon people which will help get them killed.

  30. Isn’t it just extraordinary that these lying cunts still demand evidence to back up the idea that environmentalism was the killer. We are up to our eyeballs in evidence for this contention. I really really hate this filth. There is no reform without punishment in this case.

  31. It’s amazing how many little David Irvings suddenly pop up about the place after each Green/Leftist-initiated holocaust, isn’t it?

  32. Well, that Grods blog has completely degenerated into childish name-calling. It’s quite a telling capitulation on their part. By the way, THR (I know you’re reading this), I suggest you click onto the relevant Catallaxy page, because there is a comment of yours that needs to be clarified.

  33. My oath its amazing. You want to go over to this site over here:

    http://www.grods.com/post/5303/comment-page-11/#comment-35223

    Just check these guys out. The bodies barely cooled and these assholes are to a man totally irrational and callous about this matter.

  34. Here is the final comments which Scott reckons were justification for a ban. He has never owned up to his own idiocy in this matter. The thread starts off with abuse of Bolt for reporting the obvious.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Scott

    Farken hell! I go to work for a day and look what happens.

    Enough now, I reckon.

    Everyone’s made their point and no amount of further shouting is going to convince anyone to change their opinions. Let’s just leave it there.

    Any comments from now on — Grodster or Bird — will be strictly measured against the comments policy.

    Monday 16 February 2009, 4:29 pm #Skeptic

    Hoo-bloody-ray!

    Monday 16 February 2009, 4:32 pm #Bron, Administrator

    Excuuuuuse me, who made you Administrator?!

    Oh, yeah. That’s right. I forgot.

    Monday 16 February 2009, 4:34 pm #Scott

    First warning, Bron.

    Monday 16 February 2009, 4:43 pm #Graeme Bird

    Why on earth an I part of this warning? I”m the one being spammed here and have kept up a solid record of reasoned debate in stark contrast to these idiots.

    Now has anyone got any evidence whatsoever that could let the environmentalists off the hoof for even some of these murders. Because it appears that all you’ve got is sexual harrassment and idiocy.

    Have you got some sort of reasoning or not?

    Monday 16 February 2009, 4:45 pm #Scott

    Graeme, in line with the policy this is your first official warning. Any further attempt to argue this issue will result in moderation of your comments.

    NOTICE THAT THIS WAS AT 4.45. MY NEXT COMMENT WAS ALSO AT 4.45. IT WAS AN ENQUIRY AND THIS WAS THE ONE THIS LYING ASSHOLE SCOTT USED TO BAN ME.

    Monday 16 February 2009, 4:45 pm #Ross Sharp

    Onward to 600!

    NOTICE NO WARMING FOR ROSS

    Monday 16 February 2009, 4:47 pm #THR

    Birdman meltdown in 3, 2, 1…

    Monday 16 February 2009, 4:49 pm #Graeme Bird

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Right Nothing. So what is the lesson here. Surely if you don’t want people dead the autonomy must go back to the property owner. If it does not do so we face the ludicrous prospect of larger fires and more deaths even as we get more technically sophisticated.

    Now nothing I’ve said is not plain obvious. And all that you’ve done here, all of you without exception, you dumb leftists being a total joke and pathetic……. all that you’ve done is try to deny the obvious and spit on the grave of the recently killed.

    You had nothing in the first place. You ought to have accepted what went on in the spirit of reasoned debate rather then get around spitting on the recently bereaved and their loved ones.

    Monday 16 February 2009, 4:51 pm #Scott

    Graeme, your comments are now being moderated and any further attempt to argue this issue will result in a permanent site ban. (Despite the fact that you’ve been one of the funniest things to happen on Grods in, like, days.)

    Monday 16 February 2009, 4:52 pm #Graeme Bird

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Alright. Two more posts and NOTHING from the stupid side of the argument. Nothing from the moron Ross. Nothing from THR.

    The total denial of reason is what we are seeing with my opponents.

    Its pretty simple. If you are forced to have trees close to the house your mortality will increase to a massive degree. And the environmentalists with extreme prejudice and will malice afforethought , did all they could to bring the trees closer to the house.

    So what is this fascist hateful denial all about if not that you are glad that the were murdered and wish to see more of the same?

    Monday 16 February 2009, 4:53 pm #Scott

    Bird banned.

    Monday 16 February 2009, 4:53 pm #THR

    Can the moderated comments be archived somewhere? Birdy goes postal after being moderated. It could make for some funny reading down the track.

    Monday 16 February 2009, 4:55 pm #Graeme Bird

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “Graeme, your comments are now being moderated and any further attempt to argue this issue will result in a permanent site ban. (Despite the fact that you’ve been one of the funniest things to happen on Grods in, like, days.)”

    What is the reasoning here? I cannot control your bully-boys being abusive and irrational on this matter? Why are you moderating me? Why not moderate the culprits here?

    I would have thought that moderating the culprits would have been the idea?

  35. I will be keeping that thread in mind next time I hear any leftist activists calling for hate-speech-codes against non-leftists, as they often do, on the grounds that “the Right isn’t interested in rational argument, only spewing hatred!!!”

    Physician, heal thyself.

  36. I fucking hate these people. Its just about the time when your average Joe is beginning to realise what killed everyone…. and now the roll-out of distracting propaganda is beginning. I’m just watching channel 10 news beginning a campaign of propaganda. In their view these a MEGA-FIRES created by global warming. No science behind this at all. Total idiocy. But get used to the idea of the MEGA-FIRE produced by global warming.

    Someone has to save the environment from the environmentalists. They had another story on about all the native animals killed in the fire. And they were feeding and treating these marsupials for burns and dehydrdation. So this is what these environmentalist asshats do to the habitat of our animals. Whereas the property owner, if he was free to, would send in people to cart away firewood and the fire-fighters would then be able to stop the fires.

  37. I’m really glad that catallaxy is broadly on the right side of this argument Michael. I was beginning to think of these people as shape-shifting lizards. But they are even quoting some of the home-truthz I layed on that fascist Prodeo shadow-site when my attempts at tact had been whittled away.

    “So a shitrain of callous nonsense-talk. But no actual argument.

    This is what our taxdollars are buying for us. A gaggle of ghoulish baboons. Just swine and unrisen monkeys, splurging off taxpayer largesse and apeing the upper classes.”

    One imagines that differences between one and these people can be bridged by patience and persistence and one doesn’t wish to go in for the shock treatment of fully holding up the mirror to these people. But its pretty hard to be disciplined about these things in the face of swarming abuse from these lowlifes.

  38. Bird

    You lying Stalinist douchebag.

    You took my name and posted as me at that site.

    You have no respect for private property.

    You thieving lying Stalinist prick.

    Add “kleptomania” to the list of mental disorders from which you suffer.

    You thieving, lying prick.

    WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? YOU YOURSELF STOLE THE NAME IN CONTEMPT FOR AN AMERICAN HERO, WHO HAD A GOOD LIFE AS A FOOTBALL STAR, AND WAS TRAGICALLY GUNNED DOWN BY HIS OWN MEN, AFTER GIVING UP THE GOOD LIFE OUT OF PATRIOTISM. YOU STOLE HIS NAME BECAUSE YOU WANTED TO SPIT ON ALL THE GOOD VALUES THAT ALLOW A SOCIETY TO SURVIVE.

    I CAN HARDLY THEN STEAL THAT NAME OFF YOU?

  39. These Marxists are on your side

    http://strangetimes.lastsuperpower.net/?p=188

    WELL THEY ARE RIGHT ABOUT THAT. AND YOU OUGHT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THEY ARE RIGHT ABOUT THAT. THE HUMAN MIND IS A FUNNY THING. SO THE MARXISTS ARE RIGHT ABOUT THAT AND WRONG ABOUT AN WHOLE HOST OF OTHER THINGS.

    COMPARE IT TO WHEN HITCHENS WAS A SOCIALIST. HE WAS STILL RIGHT ABOUT A LOT OF STUFF. NOT ABOUT EVERYTHING. BUT ABOUT A LOT OF STUFF.

    FISK IS A REAL PRICK. AND HIS LACK OF OBJECTIVITY IS ALWAYS ON SHOW. NOT MICHAEL BUT ROBERT FISK. BUT AS A YOUNGER JOURNALIST, WHEN IT CAME TO CONCRETE FACTS AND MANY OBSERVATIONS HE WAS (I HATE TO ADMIT IT) RIGHT ABOUT VERY MANY THINGS.

    WE MATTER OF FACT NOTE WHEN CRAZY PEOPLE ARE RIGHT. ITS A GOOD HABIT TO GET INTO.

  40. Graeme

    I shall make everyone aware of your usurpation.

    http://www.catallaxyfiles.com/blog/?p=4160#comment-119619

    Worse than Barry Soetoro, you thieving prick!

    YOU WERE FAIR GAME BECAUSE OF THE ABSOLUTELY FILTHY IMPULSE THAT MADE YOU STEAL THAT GOOD MANS NAME. BUT YES YOU ARE RIGHT I DID GO UNDER YOUR NAME. THEY THINK I WENT UNDER SOME OTHER NAMES ALSO. BUT I ONLY MADE ABOUT 3 ANONYMOUS POSTS AND ONLY UNDER YOUR NAME.

  41. You say that you didn’t name yourself after Pat Tillman in an act of spitting on this fine man and the massive tragedy of his death.

    You say this.

    If you can prove this I will not use your name as a proxy again until the end of time. If not you are forewarned that I shall use that name as proxy without mercy.

  42. Graeme

    My providing proof to you of anything won’t change the fact that you are a Stalinist usurper.

    And of course you aren’t just cheating me by stealing my name – you are cheating everyone who sees posts under my name and doesn’t know that it is cowardly you hiding.

  43. Bullshit. You stole the name off Pat to mock his deeds, his death, and his memory. And you only usually show up to indulge your piggish side if indeed there is another side.

    Now if you want me to swear off using your handle lets have some mild indication of evidence that you didn’t steal the name of the dead Tillman and run like a thief in the night.

  44. We both now I can’t prove that, short of revealing my identity (which I don’t plan to do).

    And besides you never accept proof of anything, because you are deranged and inhabit your own universe.

    * * *U R A LOON* * *

  45. Well I’m not after total proof. Just some sort of indication. Or perhaps you want to get yourself another name, say sorry to Pat and so forth.

    The fact is you went to the dead body, rifled through his pockets, stole his name, and ran like the wind.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: