Another Avenue to Prosecute Skeptics

At the United Nations, whose general hostility to free speech is fairly well established, a proposal is on the table to allow the prosecution of people, like myself, who publicly disagree with the UN’s position on climate science:

The proposal for the United Nations to accept “ecocide” as a fifth “crime against peace”, which could be tried at the International Criminal Court (ICC), is the brainchild of British lawyer-turned-campaigner Polly Higgins.

The radical idea would have a profound effect on industries blamed for widespread damage to the environment like fossil fuels, mining, agriculture, chemicals and forestry.

Supporters of a new ecocide law also believe it could be used to prosecute “climate deniers” who distort science and facts to discourage voters and politicians from taking action to tackle global warming and climate change.

9 thoughts on “Another Avenue to Prosecute Skeptics

  1. ADiff

    Proving, once again, the British Fabian socialists never met a Totalitarian (or totalitarian idea) they didn’t love.

    The UN aspires to the role of the late medieval Catholic Church, its intolerance, strident dogmatism, complete corruption, and opposition to any form of progress, change, enlightenment, and (most of all) individual human freedom.

    The day may be approaching when that morally bankrupt and intellectually sterile institution will have outlived its usefulness to us, and it’s time to leave, and take our money with us.

  2. mingy

    If the UN is as effective pushing this agenda as they are in everything else, we all should be relieved. All this does is push them further into irrelevance

  3. Max Lybbert

    What are the four crimes against peace that the UN/ICC have jurisdiction over? According to the ICC ( http://www.icc-cpi.int/Menus/ICC/About+the+Court/ ) they are genocide, aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity. It seems that they ought to spend some time improving the track record on these four issues (Darfur, for instance) before taking on more.

  4. John Meget

    Would this proposed law cut both ways? i.e. if by some wild chance science shows the AGW crowd is wrong, will they get prosecuted too?

  5. Laurent

    That’s the kind of news that’s funny. Nothing more.

    Obviously when a newspaper reports that a guy somewhere is thinking of making a proposal to do something in the UN, that’s not yet reason to react against the UN – it did not approve the proposal!
    Similarly a guy somewhere may want to ask his representative to make in the Senate a new amendment that is stupid. A reason to close the Senate and switch to monarchy?

    But that was fun, with the link to thisisecocide.com!

  6. Maddog

    CAGW, animal rights, environmentalism, etc. are unreformed religions as was the late medieval Catholic Church. They are dangerous and need to be seen for what they are. Humans need religion and with secularization we stand in a bad place with psuedoscience increasingly taking over the role once played by formal religions.

  7. Jim

    It’s high time for some UN-acide. The first step is for the US to cut funding by 95% or more. Maybe we can make that happen in a few years. We don’t have the change to spare anyway after Barry has trashed the country.

  8. Justa Joe

    “Obviously when a newspaper reports that a guy somewhere is thinking of making a proposal to do something in the UN, that’s not yet reason to react against the UN”

    Actually that’s probably the best time to nip it in the bud. Ms. Polly Higgins isn’t just some guy. She’s has connections to get the ball rolling. The whole CAGW scam started out as a nutty idea that people ignored, and look at us now.

    I’m happy the USA is not subject to the ICC.

Comments are closed.