Can Guardian journalists get any more hypocritical?

There are publications with journalists that are ‘selective’ with the facts, then there is The Guardian. Uniquely among newspaper journalists, those earnest propagandists who inhabit The Guardian possess a sense of moral superiority and engage in double standards that would shame many other reporters.

The latest example comes from Damian Carrington writing on his Environment Blog, who takes the Arizona shooting murders and subsequent discussion about violent rhetoric, and attempts to superimpose it over the climate change arena to attack those who disagree with the alarmists.

On Planet Carrington (which is no doubt heating uncontrollably and where snow and ice is a thing of the past) the violent rhetoric seems to be a one way street, from evil climate change deniers / criminals / sceptics to those noble, selfless and unimpeachable climate scientists tainted by Climategate or their simple association with the man made global warming alarmist creed.  What else could we have expected? If nasty ‘right wingers’ are fair game then it follows the Guardian’s special loathing for anyone opposed to the AGW groupthink makes them fair game for this treatment too.

Abuse, threats, intimidation and genuine violent rhetoric are reprehensible and intolerable, no matter where they originate or where they are directed.  But for once it would have been welcome to see some balance from a Guardian journalist like Carrington. That is obviously too much to ask. Which is why it falls to blogs like this to shine a light on the other side of the coin… there is enough out there and here’s a few examples:

In a post titled: ‘There will be blood‘ Carrington showed up his rank hypocrisy as he himself described the ‘No Pressure’ 10:10 video (embedded within his post) of children being blown up for ignoring their carbon footprints thus:

It’s most definitely striking and if you haven’t watched it yet – taking into account the warning that it contains scenes some people may find disturbing – do so now, before I give too much away.

Even after 10:10 took down their video, Carrington scurried off to YouTube and found another copy to link to so it could stay on his blog. He then asked his readers:

Had a look? Well, I’m certain you’ll agree that detonating school kids, footballers and movie stars into gory pulp for ignoring their carbon footprints is attention-grabbing. It’s also got a decent sprinkling of stardust – Peter Crouch, Gillian Anderson, Radiohead and others.

So it seems violent rhetoric and imagery was perfectly acceptable to Carrington as it furthered his agenda and was ‘edgy’ and sprinked with stardust.  Nice to have him out of the intolerance closet.  Here’s a few others:

Why climate change deniers should be blown to bits…

Finnish environmentalist recommends that climate change deniers be “re-educated” in eco-gulags and that the vast majority of humans be killed with the rest enslaved and controlled by a green police state…

(link)

About these ads

7 Responses to “Can Guardian journalists get any more hypocritical?”


  1. 1 Tufty 12/01/2011 at 1:38 pm

    Good post AM – I’ve always thought there is something deeply peculiar about the Guardian. Carrington’s piece is standard straw man stuff with a ham-fisted sprinkling of silly innuendo. It isn’t even well-written, as if he dashed it off while recovering from something.

  2. 2 William Teach 12/01/2011 at 3:19 pm

    But, you have to understand, AM, that what they are doing is not threatening, violent, negative, etc. It is “though provoking,” “allegorical,” “just wanting to save the planet”, etc and so on. Only us “Deniers” can be big meanies.

    At a post at Treehugger about returning to civil debate (http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/01/calls-tone-down-rhetoric-civility-green-debate.php), I brought up the 1010 kids blowing up video, and was told “Because those weren’t calls to violence, those were cautionary in nature. Though I did watch the one with exploding people, hilarious and certainly in poor taste.”

    See? We just Don’t Get It. It’s all our fault, or something. Because the Warmists are never in the wrong.

  3. 3 Tory Aardvark 12/01/2011 at 3:28 pm

    Glad to see someone else picked up on this

    http://toryardvaark.wordpress.com/2011/01/11/the-voilent-rhetoric-of-political-debate-climate-nazis/

    no mention of James Lee and violent actions at Discovery Channel

  4. 4 Tom Mills 12/01/2011 at 4:18 pm

    What about James Hansen & his “death trains” Also his references to the heads of oil companies.

  5. 5 JuliaM 12/01/2011 at 5:48 pm

    “no mention of James Lee and violent actions at Discovery Channel”

    No, that one went down the memory hole pretty fast, didn’t it?

  6. 6 Autonomous Mind 12/01/2011 at 6:41 pm

    I missed a trick with those Julia. That was my rush to publish again… :)

  7. 7 Rereke Whakaaro 14/01/2011 at 9:15 am

    Tufty: “It isn’t even well-written, as if he dashed it off while recovering from something.”

    Perhaps the poor darling mistakenly got two thoughts in his mind at the same time … and they collided.

    Accidents like that can scar a journalist for life.


Comments are currently closed.



Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

  • RT @AgenceMascarade: В МВЭСИТ прошла встреча с советником Президента Черногории http://t.co/pl7G2mPzGn 1 day ago
  • НАТО опубликовало фотографию голландской подлодки у причала в Таллине 2 days ago
  • - Я подарил своей жене книгу Как экономить деньги. - И каков результат? - Я бросил курить и похудел на 10 кг. 2 days ago

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive