When will Gore & his ilk be held legally accountable for his 'Man-did-it' global warming hoax?

Question

It's Not About the Science

“…. global warming is driven more by the search for funding than the search for scientific truth. "Big science" was adrift in the early 1990s, like many other beneficiaries of the Cold War, and was desperate to sustain its federal funding. It (AGW) could be used to frighten the politicians and the public… to extract billions of dollars for research to prevent it. ………"saving the planet" had a nice ring to it and seemed to portend big bucks at the end of the global warming rainbow.

Once in power, Al Gore, a strident environmentalist, began to remake the government bureaucracy in his image. His life experience in Washington had taught him the value of the old Washington truism, "personnel is policy." He established a White House Climate Change Task Force and placed his former legislative aide, 29-year old Kathleen McGinty, in charge of a new White House Office on Environmental Policy….. on the National Security Council, the new National Economic Council, and the Domestic Policy Council as a symbol of the importance of environmental policy in the Clinton White House. McGinty would be in charge of seeding the government bureaucracies with "greens" …… Former NASA chief scientist Robert Watson, a Gore favorite, became associate director in the White House Office of Science and Technology (OSTP). Gore brought in other "green" lawyers and lobbyists to populate the new White House positions.

Tim Wirth, a former Democratic senator from Colorado, became Undersecretary for Global Affairs at the State Department…Wirth had proclaimed that it didn't matter if the science of global warming was right or wrong, the economic and environmental policies would be right for America.

http://www.aim.org/publications/aim_report/2002/15.html

Answer 1

As soon as shrub and his friends are held accountable for his "they have WMD's and we know where they are."

Edit:    Hmmm. Gore, White House, Washington, Democratic....   Sounds like you should be on the Politics message board to me.    Climate change should not be about politics but  some people are determined to make it so in their "questions".

Answer 2

When temperatures drop into the 1970s range and NASA gets the majority of the worldwide records repaired as they have the USA ones. At that point there will probably a world court convened to put Al Gore and his associates that assisted him in this massive world wide con game on trial and most likely with long jail terms and massive fines and confiscation of asset’s of the worst offenders.

Answer 3

BB, you're a hypocrite.  You criticize thor for raising political issues, but your rant is little more than a copy-and-paste quote from an ultra-conservative political propaganda source.  There is no science at all to be found there.

Answer 4

    In response to those who object to gore being an object of ridicule. He is merely the best-known example of the type of pompous,lying, hypocrite who are seeking to feed at the public trough by use of this scam.

    

Answer 5

But global warming IS about science.  Why is it deniers are the ones to bring up Gore?  What he says or does has NOTHING to do with the scientific truth of global warming.

Here's the position of the vast majority of scientists in the world, backed by a mountain of evidence.  It has not the slightest flavor of the political nonsense you're complaining about.  As you well point out, the politics board is a better place for that.

"The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to begin taking steps to prepare for climate change and to slow it. Human actions over the next few decades will have a major influence on the magnitude and rate of future warming. Large, disruptive changes are much more likely if greenhouse gases are allowed to continue building up in the atmosphere at their present rate. However, reducing greenhouse gas emissions will require strong national and international commitments, technological innovation, and human willpower."

The National Academy of Sciences

Answer 6

Bob (above..top contributer) would have us believe that organizations like NASA GISS or the IPCC are not corrupted by leftist politics.

To the question:  who knows?  When is the last time that a politician has been held accountable for his actions in court?  It doesn't happen very often, and Al has the money now to defend himself, in the name of global warming and science, or whatever.

He's not the only one who stands to be corrected, there are plenty of others.  

Answer 7

as some as obama or mccain start an investigation into speculation driven economics. Speculation is OK EXCEPT when there is insider trading and deception involved.  Gore and his companies set up the deception they are making millions on it.

Someone mentioned WMD's.  The deception was led by Husein and like Gore he paid his debt to society. Hussein said " come get my WMD's if you dare, I'll use them on you." He has a proven track record of using them.  Its like the escaped convicted murder that tells everyone he's armed, who you stroll up and arrest him? or would you approach him locked and loaded?

Answer 8

I do find it quite tedious that this forum seems to have degenerated into American politics. The forum is GLOBAL warming, not American celebrities. I, for one, really do not care what Gore has said or not said, where he lives, how he lives, etc, etc because it is totally irrelevant to the issues.

Many of the deniers like to bring Gore up in order to deflect debate away from the real issues.

But the question asks about legal accountability - let's take a look at this, first by stipulating (against much evidence to the contrary) that AGW is false. What, one has to ask, could someone like Gore be charged with under such circumstances? There aren't any specific laws I can think of but maybe we can construct some arguments for the sort of malfeasance that has occurred...

The "charges" deal with false information - there is no stabbing or drunken drivers or broken windows here.

First it would have to be shown that Gore knowingly disseminated false information. This is going to be tough to do given the huge number of credible expert witnesses who are already on record saying that what he has said is true.

Then there would be the matter of intent (criminal law requires an intent to harm) - obviously others will have a different opinions on Gore's intentions but I cannot see any one person or groups of persons who have been harmed by his statements.

Finally, any legal repercussions would have to be based on actual damages. Who has been hurt here? Gore supposedly "peddled his false claims" to the US public and yet the USA is perhaps the one country that has acted the least in response to the AGW (allegedly false) claims. If no one acted upon his statements, then how could anyone have been hurt?

Fact is, there is a greater legal claim to be made against those who are failing to take responsibility for their polluting actions and are thus harming others by this pollution. It is for this reason that some legal claims have already been made, and quite a few others are being prepared, against the USA for direct harm to individuals and societies because the country has not done enough to restrict their carbon footprint.

Indeed, in a legal sense, the AGW deniers are much more likely to be held "legally accountable" than Al Gore.

Be very careful here:

It is called GLOBAL warming. The consequences are GLOBAL. The science is GLOBAL. The politics are GLOBAL. The legal actions will be GLOBAL. Petty squabbling within your own small corner of the world (i.e. American politics) blinds you to the real legal risks and liabilities that are far more widespread than who was made an undersecretary in one country.

Answer 9

Since liberals are famous for eating their own, it may be soon.

The carbon credit market is crashing.  Few people support the ridiculous claims of Al and crew.

As Al costs the "believers" money, they will help prosecute him to divert attention from themselves.

Note:  People who are part of the global warming fraud are likely to react badly to this question.  No need to take it personally.

Answer 10

BB, I believe there is a Politics board that is available for you to vent on. When you deniers can cite real science instead of blatant propaganda from the jerks at AIM, bought and paid for by the likes of Exxon, Chevron, Getty Oil, Mobil, Phillips and Texaco, perhaps you might have a bit of credibility.

Until then, you're just another political hack pretending to know science, and stooping to lies to "prove" your point.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?t*t...