ClimateGate and the UN: New Red Scare over Green Lies

-By Warner Todd Huston

Believe it or not, the UN just whined that climategate is the Russian’s fault. It appears that the United Nation’s position is that the obvious cover-up of the false doctrine that is global warming perpetrated by global warming “scientists” is not the fault of the lying scientists, but that of the assumed “paid” Russian hacker that hacked the globaloney scientist’s emails and exposed the cover-up to the world. Convoluted reasoning, no?

Remember when you were a child and your Mother discovered through hearing about it from the neighbors that you were doing something you weren’t supposed to be doing? Remember how instead of taking responsibility for your actions you cried that it wasn’t right that someone narced on you? Well, that is the same sort of childish, facile reasoning that the UN has employed to explain away this climaegate scandal.

Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, a vice-chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), recently said that the hacked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) were obtained and hyped by Russia in order to “destroy public confidence” in the “science” of man-made global warming… or is it now “climate change”? It’s hard to keep up with their constant name changing as they look for more sellable rhetoric.

Just like that kid that’s mad at getting caught but can’t see that he is at fault in the first place, the UN is now trying to get everyone to consider this as “hackergate” instead of climategate. Various UN folks are in essence telling us not to look “here,” but to instead look “over there.”

A few quotes:

“This is not ‘climategate’ it’s ‘hackergate’. Let’s not forget the word ‘gate’ refers to a place where data was stolen by people who were paid to do so. So the media should direct its investigations into that.” — Achim Steiner, director of the UN Environment Program

“We are spending a lot of useless time discussing this rather than spending time preparing information for the negotiators.” — Jean-Pascal van Ypersele

Yes, like a bad magician telling us to look at his right hand while his left hand is fishing around in his pocket for the “magic” card, the UN is trying desperately to make us forget about the actual contents of the emails while continuing to parlay its particular brand of economy-killing “magic” with its IPCC climate policies.

Skepticism against global warming is growing. Fortunately, it seems that the UN and these “climate change” salesmen are now fighting a rearguard action to try and keep their big government, nanny state plans rolling forward. The sad truth is that all their nanny state styled, economically inviable policies are little different than the sort of anti-capitalist (read anti-American) policies that have been pushed by the UN since it first met.

It’s all just another effort to eliminate local control, local custom, and religious affiliation and vest all power in a central, singular body. And that goal is the most tyrannical idea of them all. Without custom, and religion, the unitary state without question devolves into tyranny. Without these intermediary institutions, these strong and voluntary associations outside of governmental control, there is no way to maintain civil liberty. But with them in place there is no way for far off masters to fully control the people. The UN and other nanny staters, therefore, must destroy these institutions.

For its part, the UN would see these local interests, religions, even local governments squelched leaving itself as the arbiter of man’s relations, his education, his field of work, even his very soul. And the policies of “carbon trading” and the other prescriptions emanating from the global warming true believers are intended to do just that.

But people are starting to wake up. India has let it be known that it rejects Danish climate proposals. Australia has had a major party shake up over the issue with the result that its own cap and tax plan has arrived still born. And a recent Rasmussen poll found that more Americans than ever are skeptical about the science behind global warming. Cracks are appearing in the credibility of global warming.

So it’s no wonder that the UN is trying to make this into “hackergate” instead of “climategate.” Just as the refrain from the “well informed” during the Cold War was that an inordinate fear of communism, a red scare, was discreditable — even as they lost that fight when communism fell — now the same sorts of people are trying to substitute the old red arguments with green ones. And in a similar vein these folks are trying to discredit skeptics of their green policies. So, green is the new red, indeed. Let us strive to defeat these attempts as well.

(Cross posted at
“The only end of writing is to enable the reader better to enjoy life, or better to endure it.”
–Samuel Johnson

Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart’s,,,,,, Human Events Magazine,, and the New Media Journal, among many, many others. Additionally, he has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs to discuss his opinion editorials and current events and is currently the co-host of “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Conservatism” heard on BlogTalkRadio. Warner is also the editor of the Cook County Page for

He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the new book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture” which can be purchased on He is also the owner and operator of Feel free to contact him with any comments or questions : EMAIL Warner Todd Huston

Fair Use: This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site/blog for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Copyright Publius Forum 2001