How is this not as vile as Pat Robertson?
01/18/10
There was no shortage of people champing at the bit to condemn Pat Robertson's recent stupidity in reasoning that the Haiti earthquake was the result of a supposed "deal with the devil" made by the Hatian people to emancipate themselves from French rule. To that point, I agreed in a post last week — while noting the utter hypocrisy of those who ripped Robertson's contemptible bile by ... wishing death on him. A reasoned response and a trenchant rejoinder, for sure. But I digress.
Noted climate scientist political theorist actor (who, to my knowledge, hasn't had a gig since Lethal Weapon 4) Danny Glover offered this pearl of wisdom as to the cause of the earthquake:
That means that other countries in the region — Venezuela, Brazil, Cuba and other countries have already accepted the point that this is a great moment for another type of internationalism, you know.
And I hope we seize this particular moment because the threat of what happens in Haiti is the threat that can happen anywhere in the Caribbean to these island nations, you know?
They're all in peril because of global warming; they're all in peril because of climate change. When we see what we did at the climate summit in Copenhagen, this is the response, this is what happens, you know what I'm saying?
But we have to act now.
So global warming is causing a global cooling trend (that must be hidden in the data, per the Illuminati at East Anglia) and 7+ magnitude earthquakes. Best not to question how. I'm sure the science is settled.
I would love for any of those who so vitriolically attacked Robertson to explain exactly how alleging that the Haiti earthquake is consequence for failing to reach a global governance consensus at Copenhagen isn't equally as repugnant as Robertson.
I saw dozens of condemnations of Robertson. I've seen none so far of Glover.